IMPORTANCEA binocular approach to treating anisometropic and strabismic amblyopia has recently been advocated. Initial studies have yielded promising results, suggesting that a larger randomized clinical trial is warranted. OBJECTIVE To compare visual acuity (VA) improvement in children with amblyopia treated with a binocular iPad game vs part-time patching. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSA multicenter, noninferiority randomized clinical trial was conducted in community and institutional practices from September 16, 2014, to August 28, 2015. Participants included 385 children aged 5 years to younger than 13 years with amblyopia (20/40 to 20/200, mean 20/63) resulting from strabismus, anisometropia, or both. Participants were randomly assigned to either 16 weeks of a binocular iPad game prescribed for 1 hour a day (190 participants; binocular group) or patching of the fellow eye prescribed for 2 hours a day (195 participants; patching group). Study follow-up visits were scheduled at 4, 8, 12, and 16 weeks. A modified intent-to-treat analysis was performed on participants who completed the 16-week trial. INTERVENTIONS Binocular iPad game or patching of the fellow eye.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Change in amblyopic-eye VA from baseline to 16 weeks. RESULTSOf the 385 participants, 187 were female (48.6%); mean (SD) age was 8.5 (1.9) years. At 16 weeks, mean amblyopic-eye VA improved 1.05 lines (2-sided 95% CI, 0.85-1.24 lines) in the binocular group and 1.35 lines (2-sided 95% CI, 1.17-1.54 lines) in the patching group, with an adjusted treatment group difference of 0.31 lines favoring patching (upper limit of the 1-sided 95% CI, 0.53 lines). This upper limit exceeded the prespecified noninferiority limit of 0.5 lines. Only 39 of the 176 participants (22.2%) randomized to the binocular game and with log file data available performed more than 75% of the prescribed treatment (median, 46%; interquartile range, 20%-72%). In younger participants (aged 5 to <7 years) without prior amblyopia treatment, amblyopic-eye VA improved by a mean (SD) of 2.5 (1.5) lines in the binocular group and 2.8 (0.8) lines in the patching group. Adverse effects (including diplopia) were uncommon and of similar frequency between groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn children aged 5 to younger than 13 years, amblyopic-eye VA improved with binocular game play and with patching, particularly in younger children (age 5 to <7 years) without prior amblyopia treatment. Although the primary noninferiority analysis was indeterminate, a post hoc analysis suggested that VA improvement with this particular binocular iPad treatment was not as good as with 2 hours of prescribed daily patching.TRIAL REGISTRATION http://www.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02200211

In teenagers aged 13 to <17 years, improvement in amblyopic eye VA with the binocular iPad game used in this study was not found to be better than patching, and was possibly worse. Nevertheless, it remains unclear whether the minimal treatment response to binocular treatment was owing to poor treatment adherence or lack of treatment effect.

When viewing monocularly, children with unilateral amblyopia had greater mean accommodative errors in their amblyopic eyes than in their nonamblyopic eyes, and when compared with control subjects. This could lead to unintended retinal image defocus during patching therapy for amblyopia.

Relatively few patients with Cornelia de Lange syndrome (CdLS) due to SMC1A mutation have been reported, limiting understanding of the full extent of the phenotype. Compared to children with classic NIPBL-associated CdLS, patients with SMC1A-associated CdLS have a milder physical phenotype with prominent intellectual disability, high rate of cleft palate and absence of limb reductions. We present a patient with SMC1A-associated CdLS who had typical features including developmental delay, seizure disorder, feeding difficulties, hirsutism, and cleft palate. She also was found to have three novel features: (i) left ventricular non-compaction (LVNC) cardiomyopathy; (ii) microform cleft lip; and (iii) severe hyperopia and astigmatism. These features have implications regarding potential insight into the pathogenesis of the disorder, screening, and medical management. Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy has previously been reported in SMC1A-associated CdLS, but to our knowledge this is the first reported child with LVNC. Previous reports have included children with isolated clefts of the palate without involvement of the lip. When cleft palate alone is associated with a disorder, the underlying pathophysiology for clefting is sometimes secondary due to mechanical blocking of the fusion of the palatal shelves with the developing tongue. The presence of microform cleft lip in this patient suggests that the pathophysiology of clefting in SMC1A is primary rather than secondary. Few studies report ophthalmologic findings specific to SMC1A. Based on these findings, LVNC cardiomyopathy and cleft lip should be considered features of SMC1A-associated CdLS. All patients should receive echocardiogram and undergo thorough ophthalmologic evaluation as part of routine CdLS care. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

PurposeRetinal image quality is dependent on accommodative performance. This longitudinal observational study of children with unilateral amblyopia evaluated the accommodative performance of the amblyopic eye during treatment.MethodsTwenty-six participants with unilateral amblyopia and 10 participants with typical vision aged 3 to 10 years participated. Accommodative response was measured using modified Nott retinoscopy in monocular and binocular viewing conditions for target distances of 50, 33, and 25 cm, at enrollment and each follow-up visit.ResultsParticipants with amblyopia accommodated less accurately when viewing with their amblyopic eye in monocular than in binocular conditions. Over the course of amblyopia treatment, accommodative performance improved with amblyopic eye visual acuity (VA) improvement, although this was not consistent across individual participants. A linear mixed model showed that accommodative error worsened with increasing depth of amblyopia for monocular viewing with the amblyopic eye (0.14 diopter [D] per line of acuity loss, P = 0.001), with an interaction between VA and stimulus demand (0.09 D of additional lag per diopter of stimulus, per line of acuity loss, P < 0.001). Participant age, patching duration, length of time in the study, history of strabismus, and stereoacuity were not significant predictors of accommodative performance.ConclusionsOverall, poor monocular accommodative performance of the amblyopic eye was associated with worse amblyopia and improved simultaneously with VA improvement, although there was variability across the study cohort. Further research is needed to determine the causal relationship between amblyopic eye VA and accommodation and its impact on amblyopia treatment.