Strabismus. 2025 Dec 2:1-8. doi: 10.1080/09273972.2025.2579178. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy of the Cambridge Visual Stimulator (CAM) in pediatric amblyopia, by comparing outcomes of standard occlusion therapy alone versus occlusion combined with CAM.
METHODS: In this retrospective cohort, 112 patients (112 eyes) aged ≤10 years with strabismic or anisometropic amblyopia were assigned to one of two groups. Group 1 (n = 64) received three hours/day of occlusion therapy; Group 2 (n = 48) received the same occlusion regimen plus a supervised 5-day CAM course (six rotating high-contrast spatial-frequency disks, 18 minutes daily). Best-corrected visual acuity was recorded in logMAR at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Within-group improvements were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and between-group differences with the Mann – Whitney U test. P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: Both groups showed significant acuity gains at 6 and 12 months versus baseline (p < .001 for all comparisons). Numerically, Group 2 improved more (6 months: -0.137 ± 0.231 vs. -0.127 ± 0.196; 12 months: -0.192 ± 0.267 vs. -0.190 ± 0.225), but these differences did not reach significance (6 months p = .402; 12 months p = .883).
CONCLUSION: Occlusion therapy markedly enhances visual acuity in amblyopic children, whereas adjunctive CAM yields only limited additional benefit. Prospective, larger-scale trials are needed to determine whether specific subgroups – such as treatment-resistant cases – may derive clinically meaningful gains from CAM.
PMID:41329471 | DOI:10.1080/09273972.2025.2579178
