ARC really changed my life not bc of my vision slowly fading but bc of the lazy eye it created (and it's an outward lazy eye..lucky me🙃) it changed my life bc it lowered my self-esteem ,I'm getting bullied, people mocking lazy eye/ pointing it out/ saying it's weird..and the worst part nobody cares,my mom won't even let me get the lazy eye surgery,it would definitely change my life or even save my life..cuz I'm just so tired of my life
I may have anomalous anomalous retinal correspondence. :-) Strabismic ± from birth, alternating esotropia with a deviation of ± 30°. Myopic and astigmatic in both eyes, but by about the same amount. Left eye is weakly dominant in some contexts. I had never had diplopia until about 38 (currently 42), at which point I developed intermittent diplopia when using my right eye. The second image from the left eye appears 2-3 degrees above and to the left of the image from the right eye. The second image usually appears only for the part of the visual field seen by the right fovea, though it covers an area maybe 2-3 times the size of the right fovea. I normally suppress input from one eye, at least the fovea and presumably most of the area of overlap, but peripheral vision from the suppressed eye lines up as it should-there is usually no subjectively discernible anomaly. If I close the eye I'm using without changing fixation, the visual field stays where it is and I'm now fixating on whatever happened to be in line with the other fovea. At very close distances where my eyes converge, retinal correspondence is normal and I usually intermittently combine input from both eyes, but without depth perception-and because there's no depth perception, it only works well on ± planar objects like books or cell phones. I'm myopic enough to focus on things at this distance, so this is often how I use a cell phone. I have, rarely, experienced some depth perception in this context. In the last year or two, I figured out I can combine input from both eyes at distance, too, by fixating separately on objects falling within both foveas. I end up with a nicely unified visual field with two fixation points, but no depth perception. It's pretty ephemeral and difficult to maintain, and only really seems to work on relatively planar scenes (e.g., fixating on a couple of things on a wall). But wait, there's more! I had eye muscle surgery recently, which got me to around 7° deviation (as far as was feasible with modifying the medial rectus of each eye; the surgeon had considered adding the lateral rectus in one eye but decided on a more conservative approach). Nothing in the description of subjective experience above changed in the first couple of months post-surgery. When I woke up from anesthesia, I had anomalous retinal correspondence at the new deviation. In the past several weeks, I get occasional binocular vision for objects within my current convergence distance-far more frequently, and much better, than had ever been the case before. I also get occasional binocular vision at distance, in the dark with my glasses off, for much of the visual field except near whatever I'm fixating on (and, really, it works best if I'm not fixating on anything but putting my attention on the visual field as a whole). I've also been working with red & green glasses + alternating red & green strips of plastic on a large computer monitor that covers a fair amount of my visual field. One of the interesting things I noticed in that context is that I'm usually pulling input from the suppressed eye on both sides of the visual field. If I'm using my right eye & that side is red, my default is to get strips of red for a big chunk centered more or less on the point of fixation, one or two green strips on both edges. Presumably it would go back to red for the part of peripheral vision beyond the reach of the left eye, though I haven't checked that. So far as I can tell, this set of experiences "shouldn't" occur, so I figured I'd share it. I'd also been meaning to right more of this down for my own purposes.
(In reference to the Worth 4-dot test discussed here: ua-cam.com/video/CUw2eOERq8M/v-deo.html - in that context I usually get diplopia but the dots are next to each other, not at the relative positions that would be implied by the deviation angle. The visual field as a whole is usually a mosaic of the input from both eyes, with the seams not usually subjectively detectable, but point sources in dark conditions tend to show up even if that part of the visual field isn't otherwise being handled by that eye...)
Oooookaaaay, help me out, here. Presentation: ... somewhat cosmetically coordinated eyes. Diagnosis: slight esotropia+suppression, OD. Vision Therapy binocular activities resulted in: OS esotropia, & wildly fluctuating diplopia. JFC, I have been to 2 neuro-optometrists, & UTSWMed. All were like, "We got this! BO glasses & *lotsa* VT!" Okay, so... it's been 3 miserable years of actually doing the homework for VT, &....I really wish I'd: Saved the cash. Kept my cosmetic eye alignment. Any thoughts as to why, with the introduction of binocular activities (namely, the Brock String), the symptoms & cosmetic appearance would exponentially deteriorate??!?
My vision therapist said i have this problem. I'm still hoping it can be fixed. Also, i wonder if this happened because i had eye surgery when i was an infant.
Is there any way to cure double vision due to abnormal retinal correspondence??I have started having it after erm surgery. I did not have it before surgery. Pl help
I will try to take a crack at this! Someone correct me if I'm messing anything up! It's helpful first to know that there are subjective and objective tests for measuring a deviation (eye turn). Subjective tests include tests that rely upon a patient to tell you when two targets are aligned e.g. Modified Thorington, Maddox Rod, Von Graef etc. An objective test would be a cover test in which the practitioner measures a deviation. Harmonious ARC is when the subjective angle of the deviation (e.g. measured with Maddox Rod) is roughly equal to zero i.e. the target appears to be lined up for the patient when basically no prism has been added. Your objective measurement in this case could be anything, but the patient still does not need prism to feel aligned. Nonharmonious is when the subjective angle of the deviation and objective angle of the deviation are not equal. So, on cover test you might measure someone as having 22^ XT, but subjectively they report alignment of the targets at 11^ BI. Normal correspondence would be if the subjective and objective angles were roughly equal. It's definitely helpful to try to draw a picture if you can :)
Dude you are way way better than any of my teachers. Fantastic and simple
ARC really changed my life not bc of my vision slowly fading but bc of the lazy eye it created (and it's an outward lazy eye..lucky me🙃) it changed my life bc it lowered my self-esteem ,I'm getting bullied, people mocking lazy eye/ pointing it out/ saying it's weird..and the worst part nobody cares,my mom won't even let me get the lazy eye surgery,it would definitely change my life or even save my life..cuz I'm just so tired of my life
Thanks doctor, your channel is always a good help to study and understand at every level the ocular diseases
Fantastic, informative video - thank you!
I may have anomalous anomalous retinal correspondence. :-) Strabismic ± from birth, alternating esotropia with a deviation of ± 30°. Myopic and astigmatic in both eyes, but by about the same amount. Left eye is weakly dominant in some contexts. I had never had diplopia until about 38 (currently 42), at which point I developed intermittent diplopia when using my right eye. The second image from the left eye appears 2-3 degrees above and to the left of the image from the right eye. The second image usually appears only for the part of the visual field seen by the right fovea, though it covers an area maybe 2-3 times the size of the right fovea.
I normally suppress input from one eye, at least the fovea and presumably most of the area of overlap, but peripheral vision from the suppressed eye lines up as it should-there is usually no subjectively discernible anomaly. If I close the eye I'm using without changing fixation, the visual field stays where it is and I'm now fixating on whatever happened to be in line with the other fovea. At very close distances where my eyes converge, retinal correspondence is normal and I usually intermittently combine input from both eyes, but without depth perception-and because there's no depth perception, it only works well on ± planar objects like books or cell phones. I'm myopic enough to focus on things at this distance, so this is often how I use a cell phone. I have, rarely, experienced some depth perception in this context. In the last year or two, I figured out I can combine input from both eyes at distance, too, by fixating separately on objects falling within both foveas. I end up with a nicely unified visual field with two fixation points, but no depth perception. It's pretty ephemeral and difficult to maintain, and only really seems to work on relatively planar scenes (e.g., fixating on a couple of things on a wall).
But wait, there's more! I had eye muscle surgery recently, which got me to around 7° deviation (as far as was feasible with modifying the medial rectus of each eye; the surgeon had considered adding the lateral rectus in one eye but decided on a more conservative approach). Nothing in the description of subjective experience above changed in the first couple of months post-surgery. When I woke up from anesthesia, I had anomalous retinal correspondence at the new deviation. In the past several weeks, I get occasional binocular vision for objects within my current convergence distance-far more frequently, and much better, than had ever been the case before. I also get occasional binocular vision at distance, in the dark with my glasses off, for much of the visual field except near whatever I'm fixating on (and, really, it works best if I'm not fixating on anything but putting my attention on the visual field as a whole).
I've also been working with red & green glasses + alternating red & green strips of plastic on a large computer monitor that covers a fair amount of my visual field. One of the interesting things I noticed in that context is that I'm usually pulling input from the suppressed eye on both sides of the visual field. If I'm using my right eye & that side is red, my default is to get strips of red for a big chunk centered more or less on the point of fixation, one or two green strips on both edges. Presumably it would go back to red for the part of peripheral vision beyond the reach of the left eye, though I haven't checked that.
So far as I can tell, this set of experiences "shouldn't" occur, so I figured I'd share it. I'd also been meaning to right more of this down for my own purposes.
(In reference to the Worth 4-dot test discussed here: ua-cam.com/video/CUw2eOERq8M/v-deo.html - in that context I usually get diplopia but the dots are next to each other, not at the relative positions that would be implied by the deviation angle. The visual field as a whole is usually a mosaic of the input from both eyes, with the seams not usually subjectively detectable, but point sources in dark conditions tend to show up even if that part of the visual field isn't otherwise being handled by that eye...)
LOVE THIS
Oooookaaaay, help me out, here.
Presentation: ... somewhat cosmetically coordinated eyes.
Diagnosis: slight esotropia+suppression, OD.
Vision Therapy binocular activities resulted in: OS esotropia, & wildly fluctuating diplopia.
JFC, I have been to 2 neuro-optometrists, & UTSWMed. All were like, "We got this! BO glasses & *lotsa* VT!"
Okay, so... it's been 3 miserable years of actually doing the homework for VT, &....I really wish I'd:
Saved the cash.
Kept my cosmetic eye alignment.
Any thoughts as to why, with the introduction of binocular activities (namely, the Brock String), the symptoms & cosmetic appearance would exponentially deteriorate??!?
Would that lead to monofixation?
My vision therapist said i have this problem. I'm still hoping it can be fixed. Also, i wonder if this happened because i had eye surgery when i was an infant.
Is there any way to cure double vision due to abnormal retinal correspondence??I have started having it after erm surgery. I did not have it before surgery. Pl help
Is this the same thing as suppression?
nope
In suppression there occurs Amblyopia as a result of suppression of deviated eye. Usually in Large angle squint.
Who the hell will explain Harmomious vs Unharmonius ARC
I will try to take a crack at this! Someone correct me if I'm messing anything up! It's helpful first to know that there are subjective and objective tests for measuring a deviation (eye turn). Subjective tests include tests that rely upon a patient to tell you when two targets are aligned e.g. Modified Thorington, Maddox Rod, Von Graef etc. An objective test would be a cover test in which the practitioner measures a deviation. Harmonious ARC is when the subjective angle of the deviation (e.g. measured with Maddox Rod) is roughly equal to zero i.e. the target appears to be lined up for the patient when basically no prism has been added. Your objective measurement in this case could be anything, but the patient still does not need prism to feel aligned. Nonharmonious is when the subjective angle of the deviation and objective angle of the deviation are not equal. So, on cover test you might measure someone as having 22^ XT, but subjectively they report alignment of the targets at 11^ BI. Normal correspondence would be if the subjective and objective angles were roughly equal. It's definitely helpful to try to draw a picture if you can :)