Pediatric Ophthalmology

AIM: To characterize the neuro-ophthalmological phenotype of cyclin-dependent kinase-like 5 (CDKL5) deficiency disorder (CDD) and assess visual acuity as a reproducible, quantitative outcome measure. METHOD: We retrospectively analyzed clinical data from patients with CDD. Complete neuro-ophthalmological assessments, including visual acuity, were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 26 patients (22 females, four males; median age 4y, interquartile range 2y 1mo-7y 10mo), cerebral visual impairment (CVI), defined as visual dysfunction in the absence of ocular or anterior visual pathway abnormalities, was diagnosed in all those over 2 years of age. Ophthalmological examinations revealed nystagmus in 10 patients and strabismus in 24 patients. Visual acuity was measured in 24 patients, by preferential looking in all and by sweep visual evoked potential in 13. Visual acuities were lower than age expectations and demonstrated improvement in the first 3 years. Adjusting for age and sex, average preferential looking visual acuity after 2 years of age was higher in patients with intact mobility than in those who were non-mobile. INTERPRETATION: CVI was observed in patients with CDD. Visual acuity improved over time and correlated with mobility. Visual acuity, as a quantifiable measure of visual function, should be considered as an outcome measure in pre-clinical and clinical studies for CDD. What this paper adds Cerebral visual impairment is highly prevalent in cyclin-dependent kinase-like 5 deficiency disorder (CDD). Visual acuity is a measurable quantitative outcome measure in CDD. Visual acuity in CDD correlates with gross motor ability.

Avascular peripheral retina in an infant is a common characteristic of numerous pediatric retinal vascular disorders and often presents a diagnostic challenge to the clinician. In this review, key features of each disease in the differential diagnosis, from retinopathy of prematurity, familial exudative vitreoretinopathy, Coats disease, incontinentia pigmenti, Norrie disease, and persistent fetal vasculature, to other rare hematologic conditions and telomere disorders, will be discussed by expert ophthalmologists in the field.

PURPOSE: To report practice patterns of intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) and outcomes data with a focus on retreatments and complications. DESIGN: Multicenter, international, retrospective, consecutive series. SUBJECTS: Patients with ROP treated with anti-VEGF injections from 2007 to 2021. METHODS: Twenfty-three sites (16 United States [US] and 7 non-US) participated. Data collected included demographics, birth characteristics, examination findings, and methods of injections. Comparisons between US and non-US sites were made. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes included number and types of retreatments as well as complications. Secondary outcomes included specifics of the injection protocols, including types of medication, doses, distance from limbus, use of antibiotics, and quadrants where injections were delivered. RESULTS: A total of 1677 eyes of 918 patients (43% female, 57% male) were included. Mean gestational age was 25.7 weeks (range, 21.2-41.5 weeks), and mean birth weight was 787 g (range, 300-2700 g). Overall, a 30-gauge needle was most commonly used (51%), and the quadrant injected was most frequently the inferior-temporal (51.3%). The distance from the limbus ranged from 0.75 to 2 mm, with 1 mm being the most common (65%). Bevacizumab was the most common anti-VEGF (71.4%), with a dose of 0.625 mg in 64% of cases. Overall, 604 (36%) eyes required retreatment. Of those, 79.8% were retreated with laser alone, 10.6% with anti-VEGF injection alone, and 9.6% with combined laser and injection. Complications after anti-VEGF injections occurred in 15 (0.9%) eyes, and no cases of endophthalmitis were reported. Patients in the United States had lower birth weights and gestational ages (665.6 g and 24.5 weeks, respectively) compared with non-US patients (912.7 g and 26.9 weeks, respectively) (P < 0.0001). Retreatment with reinjection and laser was significantly more common in the US compared with the non-US group (8.5% vs. 4.7% [P = 0.0016] and 55% vs. 7.2% [P < 0.001], respectively). There was no difference in the incidence of complications between the 2 geographic subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Anti-VEGF injections for ROP were safe and well tolerated despite a variance in practice patterns. Infants with ROP receiving injections in the US tended to be younger and smaller, and they were treated earlier with more retreatments than non-US neonates with ROP.

PURPOSE: To compare the types and dosages of anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGFs) to ascertain whether specific dosages or types of injection were associated with retreatment in clinical practice in the United States. DESIGN: Multicenter, retrospective, consecutive series. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) treated with anti-VEGF injections from 2007 to 2021. METHODS: Sixteen sites from the United States participated. Data collected included demographics, birth characteristics, examination findings, type and dose of anti-VEGF treatment, retreatment rates, and time to retreatment. Comparisons of retreatment rates between bevacizumab and ranibizumab intravitreal injections were made. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Relative rate of retreatment between varying types of anti-VEGF therapy, including bevacizumab and ranibizumab, and the various dosages used for each. RESULTS: Data from 873 eyes of 661 patients (61% male and 39% female) were collected. After exclusion of 40 eyes treated with laser before anti-VEGF injection and 266 eyes re-treated with laser at or beyond 8 weeks after the initial anti-VEGF treatment, 567 eyes of 307 patients (63% male and 37% female) remained and were included in the primary analysis. There was no difference between the no retreatment and retreatment groups in terms of birthweight, gestational age, age at first injection, ROP stages, or number of involved clock hours. The retreatment group had a larger percentage of aggressive ROP (34% vs. 18%, P < 0.001) and greater percentage of zone 1 ROP (49 vs. 34%, P = 0.001) than the no retreatment group. Ranibizumab use was associated with a higher rate of retreatment than bevacizumab use (58% vs. 37%, P < 0.001), whereas the rate of retreatment was not associated with a specific dose of ranibizumab (R2 = 0.67, P = 0.32). Meanwhile, lower doses of bevacizumab were associated with higher rates of retreatment compared with the higher doses (R2 = 0.84, P = 0.01). There was a dose-specific trend with higher doses trending toward lower retreatments for bevacizumab. CONCLUSIONS: In a multicenter study of ROP patients initially treated with anti-VEGF therapy, ranibizumab and lower-dose bevacizumab use were associated with an increased rate of retreatment when compared with higher-dose bevacizumab. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

PURPOSE: To assess the rates of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) and treatment-warranted ROP in a modern set of patients meeting 0 or 1 of the current ROP screening criteria. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Single-center study of 9350 infants screened for ROP from 2009 to 2019. Rates of ROP and treatment-warranted ROP were evaluated in group 1 (birth weight [BW] <1500 g and gestational age [GA] ≥30 weeks), group 2 (BW ≥1500 g and GA <30 weeks), and group 3 (BW ≥1500 g and GA ≥30 weeks). RESULTS: Of 7520 patients with reported BW and GA, 1612 (21.4%) patients met the inclusion criteria. The number of patients in groups 1, 2, and 3 was 466 (6.19%), 23 (0.31%), and 1123 (14.93%), respectively. The number of patients diagnosed with ROP was 20 (4.29%) in group 1, 1 (4.35%) in group 2, and 12 (1.07%) in group 3 (P < .001). The mean interval between birth and ROP diagnosis was 36.25 days (range 12-75 days) in group 1, 47 days in group 2, and 23.33 days (range 10-39 days) in group 3 (P = .05). No cases of stage 3, zone 1, or plus disease were recorded. No patients met the treatment criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Patients meeting 1 screening criterion had a low rate of ROP (<5%), with no stage 3, zone 1, or plus disease. No patients required treatment. We propose a possible algorithm (TWO-ROP) in appropriate neonatal intensive care units, with an amendment in screening protocol for this low-risk population to include only an outpatient screening examination within 1 week of discharge, or at 40 weeks if inpatient, to decrease the inpatient ROP screening burden while maintaining safety. Further external validation of this protocol would be required.

PURPOSE: To compare visual acuity (VA) improvement in children aged 7 to 12 years with amblyopia treated with a binocular iPad game plus continued spectacle correction vs. continued spectacle correction alone. DESIGN: Multicenter randomized clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred thirty-eight participants aged 7 to 12 years with amblyopia (33-72 letters, i.e., approximately 20/200 to 20/40) resulting from strabismus, anisometropia, or both. Participants were required to have at least 16 weeks of optical treatment in spectacles if needed or demonstrate no improvement in amblyopic-eye visual acuity (VA) for at least 8 weeks prior to enrollment. METHODS: Eligible participants (mean age 9.6 years, mean baseline VA of 59.6 letters, history of prior amblyopia treatment other than spectacles in 96%) were randomly assigned to treatment for 8 weeks with the dichoptic binocular Dig Rush iPad game (prescribed for 1 hour per day 5 days per week) plus spectacle wear if needed (n = 69) or continued spectacle correction alone if needed (n = 69). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in amblyopic-eye VA from baseline to 4 weeks, assessed by a masked examiner. RESULTS: At 4 weeks, mean amblyopic-eye VA letter score improved from baseline by 1.3 (2-sided 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.1-2.6; 0.026 logMAR) with binocular treatment and by 1.7 (2-sided 95% CI: 0.4-3.0; 0.034 logMAR) with continued spectacle correction alone. After adjusment for baseline VA, the letter score difference between groups (binocular minus control) was -0.3 (95% CI: -2.2 to 1.5, P = 0.71, difference of -0.006 logMAR). No difference in letter scores was observed between groups when the analysis was repeated after 8 weeks of treatment (adjusted mean: -0.1, 98.3% CI: -2.4 to 2.1). For the binocular group, adherence data from the iPad indicated that slightly more than half of the participants (58% and 56%) completed >75% of prescribed treatment by the 4- and 8-week visits, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In children aged 7 to 12 years who have received previous treatment for amblyopia other than spectacles, there was no benefit to VA or stereoacuity from 4 or 8 weeks of treatment with the dichoptic binocular Dig Rush iPad game.

PURPOSE: To study methods and adverse events of postoperative, sedated suture adjustment after strabismus surgery in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). METHODS: We reviewed the postoperative experience of all children ≤18 years of age undergoing adjustable suture strabismus surgery at Boston Children's Hospital over a 3-year period. Time in the hospital, adverse events, and surgical outcomes were reviewed to evaluate safety and healthcare resource utilization. RESULTS: Of 356 patients, 113 required suture adjustment in the PACU, including 24 adjusted while awake and 89 adjusted under sedation. For sedation, sequential boluses of propofol were administered until adjustment was complete. Complete data from the sedated adjustment was available in 76 patients. The median initial bolus was 30 mg; the median total propofol rate was 273 mcg/kg/min. Twelve patients (16%) required only a single bolus of propofol. Of remaining 64 patients, median time from initial to final propofol dose was 7 minutes. Median anesthesiologist time in the PACU was 13 minutes. In the sedated adjustment group, there were no clinically significant adverse events, and the pain score never exceeded 6 (of a possible 10). Median duration of PACU stay was shortest in the group not requiring adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Sedated suture adjustment allows for fine-tuning of postoperative binocular alignment in children and uncooperative adults. No adverse events were observed in our study group, but the procedure does increase the time patients spend in the hospital. This work will inform disclosure of risks and benefits of sedated adjustment while allowing for more accurate assessment of the cost and quality of adjustable sutures in children.

PURPOSE: To review the published literature on the efficacy of topical atropine for the prevention of myopic progression in children. METHODS: Literature searches were last conducted in December 2016 in the PubMed database with no date restrictions, but were limited to studies published in English, and in the Cochrane Library database without any restrictions. The combined searches yielded 98 citations, 23 of which were reviewed in full text. Of these, 17 articles were deemed appropriate for inclusion in this assessment and subsequently were assigned a level of evidence rating by the panel methodologist. RESULTS: Seventeen level I, II, and III studies were identified. Most of the studies reported less myopic progression in children treated with atropine compared with various control groups. All 8 of the level I and II studies that evaluated primarily myopic progression revealed less myopic progression with atropine (myopic progression ranging from 0.04±0.63 to 0.47±0.91 diopters (D)/year) compared with control participants (myopic progression ranging from 0.38±0.39 to 1.19±2.48 D/year). In studies that evaluated myopic progression after cessation of treatment, a rebound effect was noted. Several studies evaluated the optimal dosage of atropine with regard to myopic progression, rebound after treatment cessation, and minimization of side effects. Lower dosages of atropine (0.5%, 0.1%, and 0.01%) were found to be slightly less effective during treatment periods of 1 to 2 years, but they were associated with less rebound myopic progression (for atropine 0.01%, mean myopic progression after treatment cessation of 0.28±0.33 D/year, compared with atropine 0.5%, 0.87±0.52 D/year), fewer side effects, and similar long-term results for myopic progression after the study period and rebound effect were considered. The most robust and well-designed studies were carried out in Asian populations. Studies involving patients of other ethnic backgrounds failed to provide sufficient evidence of an effect of atropine on myopic progression. CONCLUSIONS: Level I evidence supports the use of atropine to prevent myopic progression. Although there are reports of myopic rebound after treatment is discontinued, this seems to be minimized by using low doses (especially atropine 0.01%).

PURPOSE: Pediatric optic neuritis (ON) is a rare disease that has not been well characterized. The Pediatric ON Prospective Outcomes Study (PON1) was the first prospective study to our knowledge aiming to evaluate visual acuity (VA) outcomes, including VA, recurrence risk, and final diagnosis 2 years after enrollment. DESIGN: Nonrandomized observational study at 23 pediatric ophthalmology or neuro-ophthalmology clinics in the United States and Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 28 (64%) of 44 children initially enrolled in PON1 (age 3-<16 years) who completed their 2-year study visit. METHODS: Participants were treated at the investigator's discretion. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Age-normal monocular high-contrast VA (HCVA). Secondary outcomes included low-contrast VA (LCVA), neuroimaging findings, and final diagnoses. RESULTS: A total of 28 participants completed the 2-year outcome with a median enrollment age of 10.3 years (range, 5-15); 46% were female, and 68% had unilateral ON at presentation. Final 2-year diagnoses included isolated ON (n = 11, 39%), myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein-associated demyelination (n = 8, 29%), multiple sclerosis (MS) (n = 4,14%), neuromyelitis optica spectrum disease (NMOSD) (n = 3, 11%), and acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (n = 2, 7%). Two participants (7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1-24) had subsequent recurrent ON (plus 1 participant who did not complete the 2-year visit); all had MS. Two other participants (7%) had a new episode in their unaffected eye. Mean presenting HCVA was 0.81 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) (∼20/125), improving to 0.14 logMAR (∼20/25-2) at 6 months, 0.12 logMAR (∼20/25-2) at 1 year, and 0.11 logMAR (20/25-1) at 2 years (95% CI, -0.08 to 0.3 [20/20+1-20/40-1]). Twenty-four participants (79%) had age-normal VA at 2 years (95% CI, 60-90); 21 participants (66%) had 20/20 vision or better. The 6 participants without age-normal VA had 2-year diagnoses of NMOSD (n = 2 participants, 3 eyes), MS (n = 2 participants, 2 eyes), and isolated ON (n = 2 participants, 3 eyes). Mean presenting LCVA was 1.45 logMAR (∼20/500-2), improving to 0.78 logMAR (∼20/125+2) at 6 months, 0.69 logMAR (∼20/100+1) at 1 year, and 0.68 logMAR (∼20/100+2) at 2 years (95% CI, 0.48-0.88 [20/50+1-20/150-1]). CONCLUSIONS: Despite poor VA at presentation, most children had marked improvement in VA by 6 months that was maintained over 2 years. Associated neurologic autoimmune diagnoses were common. Additional episodes of ON occurred in 5 (18%) of the participants (3 relapses and 2 new episodes).

PURPOSE: To review the published literature assessing the efficacy of binocular therapy for the treatment of amblyopia compared with standard treatments. METHODS: Literature searches with no date restrictions and limited to the English language were conducted in January 2018 and updated in April 2019 in the PubMed database and the Cochrane Library database with no restrictions. The search yielded 286 citations, and the full text of 50 articles was reviewed. Twenty articles met the inclusion criteria for this assessment and were assigned a level of evidence rating by the panel methodologist. Six studies were rated level I, 1 study was rated level II, and 13 studies were rated level III because of the impact on the development and popularization of this technology. RESULTS: Two of the level I and II studies reviewed described a significant improvement in visual acuity in the binocular group versus standard patching standard treatment (the total number of patients in these 2 studies was 147). However, the 5 studies that failed to show a visual improvement from binocular therapy compared with standard treatments were larger and more rigorously designed (the total number of patients in these 5 studies was 813). Level I and II studies also failed to show a significant improvement over baseline in sensory status, including depth of suppression and stereopsis of those treated with binocular therapy. Several smaller level III case series (total number of patients in these 13 studies was 163) revealed more promising results than the binocular treatments studied in the level I and II studies, especially using treatments that are more engaging and are associated with better compliance. CONCLUSIONS: There is no level I evidence to support the use of binocular treatment as a substitute for current therapies for amblyopia (including patching and optical treatment). Furthermore, 2 large randomized controlled trials showed inferior performance compared with standard patching treatment. On the basis of this review of the published literature, binocular therapy cannot be recommended as a replacement for standard amblyopia therapy. However, more research is needed to determine the potential benefits of proposed binocular treatments in the future.

Importance: To prevent blindness, repeated infant eye examinations are performed to detect severe retinopathy of prematurity (ROP), yet only a small fraction of those screened need treatment. Early individual risk stratification would improve screening timing and efficiency and potentially reduce the risk of blindness. Objectives: To create and validate an easy-to-use prediction model using only birth characteristics and to describe a continuous hazard function for ROP treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this retrospective cohort study, Swedish National Patient Registry data from infants screened for ROP (born between January 1, 2007, and August 7, 2018) were analyzed with Poisson regression for time-varying data (postnatal age, gestational age [GA], sex, birth weight, and important interactions) to develop an individualized predictive model for ROP treatment (called DIGIROP-Birth [Digital ROP]). The model was validated internally and externally (in US and European cohorts) and compared with 4 published prediction models. Main Outcomes and Measures: The study outcome was ROP treatment. The measures were estimated momentary and cumulative risks, hazard ratios with 95% CIs, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (hereinafter referred to as AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Results: Among 7609 infants (54.6% boys; mean [SD] GA, 28.1 [2.1] weeks; mean [SD] birth weight, 1119 [353] g), 442 (5.8%) were treated for ROP, including 142 (40.1%) treated of 354 born at less than 24 gestational weeks. Irrespective of GA, the risk for receiving ROP treatment increased during postnatal weeks 8 through 12 and decreased thereafter. Validations of DIGIROP-Birth for 24 to 30 weeks' GA showed high predictive ability for the model overall (AUC, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.89-0.92] for internal validation, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.90-0.98] for temporal validation, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.84-0.89] for US external validation, and 0.90 [95% CI, 0.85-0.95] for European external validation) by calendar periods and by race/ethnicity. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were numerically at least as high as those obtained from CHOP-ROP (Children's Hospital of Philadelphia-ROP), OMA-ROP (Omaha-ROP), WINROP (weight, insulinlike growth factor 1, neonatal, ROP), and CO-ROP (Colorado-ROP), models requiring more complex postnatal data. Conclusions and Relevance: This study validated an individualized prediction model for infants born at 24 to 30 weeks' GA, enabling early risk prediction of ROP treatment based on birth characteristics data. Postnatal age rather than postmenstrual age was a better predictive variable for the temporal risk of ROP treatment. The model is an accessible online application that appears to be generalizable and to have at least as good test statistics as other models requiring longitudinal neonatal data not always readily available to ophthalmologists.

PURPOSE: The International Neonatal Consortium recently published a proposed retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) activity scale intended for use in clinical trials after validation. The aim of this study was to validate the ROP activity scale (ROP-ActS) in a ROP screened cohort with protocol based collected data by evaluating the ability of the ROP-Act scores to predict ROP treatment. In addition, we aimed to evaluate the scale's sensitivity characteristic of disease severity by studying association with gestational age (GA) in comparison with conventionally used ROP stage and zone. METHODS: A cohort of 535 preterm infants with 3324 ROP examinations with an end-point of ROP treatment or end of screening in Gothenburg, Sweden, was included. Median GA was 28.1 weeks, 47.5% were girls, and 74 (13.8%) infants were treated for ROP. The validation was performed by estimating probabilities for ROP treatment, and by applying logistic and linear regression. RESULTS: The original ROP-ActS was overall well-ordered with respect to ability to predict ROP treatment but could be improved by re-ordering score 3 (zone II stage 1) and 5 (zone III stage 3) based on our clinical cohort data. The modified ROP-ActS was superior to ROP stage and zone in the prediction analysis of ROP treatment. Modified ROP-ActS was more strongly related to GA than currently used ROP stage, but not zone. CONCLUSION: In the studied cohort, the modified ROP-ActS could better predict ROP treatment compared to ROP stage and zone. Retinopathy of Prematurity Activity Scale (ROP-ActS) had a superior sensitivity characteristic studied through association to GA than conventionally used ROP stage.

IMPORTANCE: The prognostic impact of parenteral nutrition duration (PND) on retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is not well studied. Safe prediction models can help optimize ROP screening by effectively discriminating high-risk from low-risk infants. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prognostic value of PND on ROP; to update and validate the Digital ROP (DIGIROP) 2.0 birth into prescreen and screen prediction models to include all ROP-screened infants regardless of gestational age (GA) and incorporate PND; and to compare the DIGIROP model with the Weight, IGF-1, Neonatal, and ROP (WINROP) and Postnatal Growth and ROP (G-ROP) models. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective study included 11 139 prematurely born infants from 2007 to 2020 from the Swedish National Registry for ROP. Extended Poisson and logistic models were applied. Data were analyzed from August 2022 to February 2023. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Any ROP and ROP requiring treatment were studied in relation to PND. ROP treatment was the outcome in DIGIROP models. Sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and adjusted OR (aOR) with 95% CI were the main measures. Internal and external validations were performed. RESULTS: Of 11 139 screened infants, 5071 (45.5%) were girls, and the mean (SD) gestational age was 28.5 (2.4) weeks. ROP developed in 3179 infants (29%), treatment was given in 599 (5%), 7228 (65%) had PND less than 14 days, 2308 (21%) had PND for 14 days or more, and 1603 (14%) had unknown PND. PND was significantly correlated with ROP severity (Spearman r = 0.45; P < .001). Infants with 14 days or more of PND vs less than 14 days had faster progression from any ROP to ROP treatment (adjusted mean difference, -0.9 weeks; 95% CI, -1.5 to -0.3; P = .004). Infants with PND for 14 days or more vs less than 14 days had higher odds of any ROP (aOR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.62-2.10; P < .001) and of severe ROP requiring treatment (aOR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.73-2.80; P < .001). Among all 11 139 infants, the DIGIROP 2.0 models had 100% sensitivity (95% CI, 99.4-100). The specificity was 46.6% (95% CI, 45.6-47.5) for the prescreen model and 76.9% (95% CI, 76.1-77.7) for the screen model. G-ROP as well as the DIGIROP 2.0 prescreen and screen models showed 100% sensitivity on a validation subset (G-ROP: sensitivity, 100%; 95% CI, 93-100; DIGIROP prescreen: sensitivity, 100%; 95% CI, 93-100; DIGIROP screen: sensitivity, 100%; 95% CI, 93-100), whereas WINROP showed 89% sensitivity (95% CI, 77-96). Specificity for each prediction model was 29% (95% CI, 22-36) for G-ROP, 38% (95% CI, 32-46) for DIGIROP prescreen, 53% (95% CI, 46-60) for DIGIROP screen at 10 weeks, and 46% (95% CI, 39-53) for WINROP. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Based on more than 11 000 ROP-screened infants born in Sweden, PND of 14 days or more corresponded to a significantly higher risk of having any ROP and receiving ROP treatment. These findings provide evidence to support consideration of using the updated DIGIROP 2.0 models instead of the WINROP or G-ROP models in the management of ROP.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Prematurely born infants undergo costly, stressful eye examinations to uncover the small fraction with retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) that needs treatment to prevent blindness. The aim was to develop a prediction tool (DIGIROP-Screen) with 100% sensitivity and high specificity to safely reduce screening of those infants not needing treatment. DIGIROP-Screen was compared with four other ROP models based on longitudinal weights. METHODS: Data, including infants born at 24-30 weeks of gestational age (GA), for DIGIROP-Screen development (DevGroup, N=6991) originate from the Swedish National Registry for ROP. Three international cohorts comprised the external validation groups (ValGroups, N=1241). Multivariable logistic regressions, over postnatal ages (PNAs) 6-14 weeks, were validated. Predictors were birth characteristics, status and age at first diagnosed ROP and essential interactions. RESULTS: ROP treatment was required in 287 (4.1%)/6991 infants in DevGroup and 49 (3.9%)/1241 in ValGroups. To allow 100% sensitivity in DevGroup, specificity at birth was 53.1% and cumulatively 60.5% at PNA 8 weeks. Applying the same cut-offs in ValGroups, specificities were similar (46.3% and 53.5%). One infant with severe malformations in ValGroups was incorrectly classified as not needing screening. For all other infants, at PNA 6-14 weeks, sensitivity was 100%. In other published models, sensitivity ranged from 88.5% to 100% and specificity ranged from 9.6% to 45.2%. CONCLUSIONS: DIGIROP-Screen, a clinical decision support tool using readily available birth and ROP screening data for infants born GA 24-30 weeks, in the European and North American populations tested can safely identify infants not needing ROP screening. DIGIROP-Screen had equal or higher sensitivity and specificity compared with other models. DIGIROP-Screen should be tested in any new cohort for validation and if not validated it can be modified using the same statistical approaches applied to a specific clinical setting.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is currently diagnosed through repeated eye examinations to find the low percentage of infants that fulfil treatment criteria to reduce vision loss. A prediction model for severe ROP requiring treatment that might sensitively and specifically identify infants that develop severe ROP, DIGIROP-Birth, was developed using birth characteristics. DIGIROP-Screen additionally incorporates first signs of ROP in different models over time. The aim was to validate DIGIROP-Birth, DIGIROP-Screen and their decision support tool on a contemporary Swedish cohort. METHODS: Data were retrieved from the Swedish national registry for ROP (2018-2019) and two Swedish regions (2020), including 1082 infants born at gestational age (GA) 24 to <31 weeks. The predictors were GA at birth, sex, standardised birth weight and age at the first sign of ROP. The outcome was ROP treatment. Sensitivity, specificity and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with 95% CI were described. RESULTS: For DIGIROP-Birth, the AUC was 0.93 (95% CI 0.90 to 0.95); for DIGIROP-Screen, it ranged between 0.93 and 0.97. The specificity was 49.9% (95% CI 46.7 to 53.0) and the sensitivity was 96.5% (95% CI 87.9 to 99.6) for the tool applied at birth. For DIGIROP-Screen, the cumulative specificity ranged between 50.0% and 78.7%. One infant with Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome who fulfilled criteria for ROP treatment and had no missed/incomplete examinations was incorrectly flagged as not needing screening. CONCLUSIONS: DIGIROP-Birth and DIGIROP-Screen showed high predictive ability in a contemporary Swedish cohort. At birth, 50% of the infants born at 24 to <31 weeks of gestation were predicted to have low risk of severe ROP and could potentially be released from ROP screening examinations. All routinely screened treated infants, excluding those screened for clinical indications of severe illness, were correctly flagged as needing ROP screening.

PURPOSE: This proof-of-concept study evaluates the ability to assess eyelid measurements and the reproducibility of eyelid measurements using a simple measurement tool paired with digital cell phone photography in children. METHODS: Seventy consecutive patients and their siblings, 2-19 years of age, were prospectively enrolled. Participants underwent clinical examination and cell phone photography with a simple measurement tool. An ophthalmologist and nonophthalmologist assessed photographs for interpalpebral fissure distance (IPFD), margin reflex distance-1 (MRD1), and levator function (LF). Clinical examinations and photographs were repeated on the same day in a random sample (n = 20). The agreement of grading photographs compared to clinical examination was assessed using Bland-Altman plots. Intra-grader repeatability of the clinical examination, repeatability of photographic technique, and interobserver reproducibility of photographic assessment was evaluated with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). RESULTS: Of photographs acquired, both graders considered quality good/fair in 100% to assess IPFD and MRD1, and 70% to assess LF. The mean difference (limits of agreement) in mm between clinical examination and photographic assessment was 1.1 (-1.5 to 3.8) for IPFD, 0.7 (-1.8 to 3.1) for MRD1, and 1.1 (-3.5 to 5.7) for LF. Intraobserver repeatability on clinical examination was excellent for IPFD (ICC = 0.81), MRD1 (ICC = 0.88), and LF (ICC = 0.94). Repeatability of photographic technique was fair for IPFD (ICC = 0.44) and good for MRD1 (ICC = 0.74) and LF (ICC = 0.77). Interobserver photographic assessment repeatability was excellent for IPFD (ICC = 0.94), MRD1 (ICC = 0.96), and LF (ICC = 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Photographic assessment of eyelid measurements in children is possible, highly reproducible between graders, and enables documentation for future comparison.

Importance: Developmental dyslexia (DD) is a specific learning disability of neurobiological origin whose core cognitive deficit is widely believed to involve language (phonological) processing. Although reading is also a visual task, the potential role of vision in DD has been controversial, and little is known about the integrity of visual function in individuals with DD. Objective: To assess the frequency of visual deficits (specifically vergence, accommodation, and ocular motor tracking) in children with DD compared with a control group of typically developing readers. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective, uncontrolled observational study was conducted from May 28 to October 17, 2016, in an outpatient ophthalmology ambulatory clinic among 29 children with DD and 33 typically developing (TD) children. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were frequencies of deficits in vergence (amplitude, fusional ranges, and facility), accommodation (amplitude, facility, and accuracy), and ocular motor tracking (Developmental Eye Movement test and Visagraph eye tracker). Results: Among the children with DD (10 girls and 19 boys; mean [SD] age, 10.3 [1.2] years) and the TD group (21 girls and 12 boys; mean [SD] age, 9.4 [1.4] years), accommodation deficits were more frequent in the DD group than the TD group (16 [55%] vs 3 [9%]; difference = 46%; 95% CI, 25%-67%; P < .001). For ocular motor tracking, 18 children in the DD group (62%) had scores in the impaired range (in the Developmental Eye Movement test, Visagraph, or both) vs 5 children in the TD group (15%) (difference, 47%; 95% CI, 25%-69%; P < .001). Vergence deficits occurred in 10 children in the DD group (34%) and 5 children in the TD group (15%) (difference, 19%; 95% CI, -2.2% to 41%; P = .08). In all, 23 children in the DD group (79%) and 11 children in the TD group (33%) had deficits in 1 or more domain of visual function (difference, 46%; 95% CI, 23%-69%; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that deficits in visual function are far more prevalent in school-aged children with DD than in TD readers, but the possible cause and clinical relevance of these deficits are uncertain. Further study is needed to determine the extent to which treating these deficits can improve visual symptoms and/or reading parameters.

Although there are many anecdotal reports of children with developmental dyslexia complaining of vision symptoms when reading, empirical studies are lacking. The primary aim of the present study was to document self-reported vision-related symptoms in children with developmental dyslexia and typically reading peers. We also explored whether vision symptoms were correlated with sensorimotor measures of vergence, accommodation and ocular motor tracking skills. Using a prospective group comparison observational design, we assessed 28 children with developmental dyslexia (DD) and 33 typically reading children (TR) 7-11 years of age. Participants completed psychoeducational testing, a comprehensive sensorimotor eye examination, and the Convergence Insufficiency Symptom Survey (CISS), which includes 9 items pertaining to vision-related symptoms (CISS-V) and 6 that could have cognitive influence (CISS-C). CISS-V were significantly greater in DD than TR children. Ocular motor tracking, assessed by an infra-red limbal eye tracker while reading text, was most clearly associated with the visual symptoms, but only within the DD group. Vision-related symptom surveys followed by a comprehensive eye examination with detailed evaluation of sensorimotor functioning for those who report a high prevalence of symptoms may be clinically relevant for children with DD.