To date, there is no known effective treatment for the non-proliferative form of macular telangiectasia type 2.

Treatment options are limited. No treatment has to date been shown to prevent progression. The variable course of progression of the disease makes it difficult to assess the efficacy of treatments. Retinal laser photocoagulation is not helpful. In fact, laser therapy may actually enhance vessel ectasia and promote intraretinal fibrosis in these individuals. It is hoped that a better understanding of the pathogenesis of the disease may lead to better treatments.

The use of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors, which have proven so successful in treating age-related macular degeneration, have not proven to be effective in non-proliferative MacTel type 2. Ranibizumab reduces the vascular leak seen on angiography, although microperimetry suggests that neural atrophy may still proceed in treated eyes.In proliferative stages (neovascularisation), treatment with Anti-VEGF can be helpful.

CNTF is believed to have neuroprotective properties and could thus be able to slow down the progression of MacTel type 2. It has been shown to be safe to use in MacTel patients in a phase 1 safety trial.

Laser treatment of drusen has been studied. While it is possible to eliminate drusen with this treatment strategy, it has been shown that this fails to reduce the risk of developing the choroidal neovascularisation which causes the blindness associated with age-related macular degeneration.

Treatment is based

on the stage of the disease. Stage 1 does not

require treatment and

should be observed. 4

Neovascularization

(stage 2) responds well

to laser ablation or

cryotherapy.2,4 Eyes

with retinal detachments (stages

3 through 5) require surgery, with

earlier stages requiring scleral

buckles and later stages ultimately

needing vitrectomy. 2,4

More recently, the efficacy of

anti-VEGF intravitreal injections

has been studied. In one study,

these injections, as an in adjunct

with laser, helped early stages

achieve stabilization, but further

investigation is needed.6

The most crucial aspect of managing patients with macular telangiectasia is recognition of the clinical signs. This condition is relatively uncommon: hence, many practitioners may not be familiar with or experienced in diagnosing the disorder. MacTel must be part of the differential in any case of idiopathic paramacular hemorrhage, vasculopathy, macular edema or focal pigment hypertrophy, especially in those patients without a history of retinopathy or contributory systemic disease.

Treatment options for macular telangiectasia type 1 include laser photocoagulation, intra-vitreal injections of steroids, or anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents. Photocoagulation was recommended by Gass and remains to date the mainstay of treatment. It seems to be successful in causing resolution of exudation and VA improvement or stabilization in selected patients. Photocoagulation should be used sparingly to reduce the chance of producing a symptomatic paracentral scotoma and metamorphopsia. Small burns (100–200 μm) of moderate intensity in a grid-pattern and on multiple occasions, if necessary, are recommended. It is unnecessary to destroy every dilated capillary, and, particularly during the initial session of photocoagulation, those on the edge of the capillary-free zone should be avoided.

Intravitreal injections of triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) which have proved to be beneficial in the treatment of macular edema by their anti-inflammatory effect, their downregulation of VEGF production, and stabilization of the blood retinal barrier were reported anecdotally in the management of macular telangiectasia type 1. In two case reports, IVTA of 4 mg allowed a transitory reduction of retinal edema, with variable or no increase in VA. As expected with all IVTA injections, the edema recurred within 3–6 months, and no permanent improvement could be shown.14,15 In general, the effect of IVTA is short-lived and complications, mainly increased intraocular pressure and cataract, limit its use.

Indocyanine green angiography-guided laser photocoagulation directed at the leaky microaneurysms and vessels combined with sub-Tenon’s capsule injection of triamcinolone acetonide has also been reported in a limited number of patients with macular telangiectasia type 1 with improvement or stabilization of vision after a mean follow-up of 10 months.16 Further studies are needed to assess the efficacy of this treatment modality.

Recently, intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents, namely bevacizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody targeted against pro-angiogenic, circulatory VEGF, and ranibizumab, a FDA-approved monoclonal antibody fragment that targets all VEGF-A isoforms, have shown improved visual outcome and reduced leakage in macular edema form diabetes and retinal venous occlusions. In one reported patient with macular telangiectasia type 1, a single intravitreal bevacizumab injection resulted in a marked increase in VA from 20/50 to 20/20, with significant and sustained decrease in both leakage on FA and cystoid macular edema on OCT up to 12 months. It is likely that patients with macular telangiectasia type 1 with pronounced macular edema from leaky telangiectasis may benefit functionally and morphologically from intravitreal anti-VEGF injections, but this warrants further studies.

Today, laser photocoagulation remains mostly effective, but the optimal treatment of macular telangiectasia type 1 is questioned, and larger series comparing different treatment modalities seem warranted. The rarity of the disease however, makes it difficult to assess in a controlled randomized manner.

However, these treatment modalities should be considered only in cases of marked and rapid vision loss secondary to macular edema or CNV. Otherwise, a conservative approach is recommended, since many of these patients will stabilize without intervention.

A practical application of AMD-associated genetic markers is in the prediction of progression of AMD from early stages of the disease to neovascularization.

Supplements that include lutein and zeaxanthin may slow down the worsening of AMD. They have, however, not been shown to prevent the disease. There is not enough evidence to determine if statins have a role in preventing or slowing the progression of AMD. Antiangiogenic steroids such as anecortave acetate and triamcinolone acetonide have shown no evidence in preventing visual loss in people with neovascular AMD.

Currently, there is no treatment for the disease. However, ophthalmologists recommend wearing sunglasses and hats outdoors and blue-light blocking glasses when exposed to artificial light sources, such as screens and lights. Tobacco smoke and second-hand smoke should be avoided. Animal studies also show that high doses of vitamin A can be detrimental by building up more lipofuscin toxin. Dietary non-supplemental vitamin A intake may not further the disease progression.

Clinical trials are being conducted with promising early results. The trials may one day lead to treatments that might halt, and possibly even reverse, the effects of Stargardt disease using stem cell therapy, gene therapy, or pharmacotherapy.

The Argus retinal prosthesis, an electronic retinal implant, was successfully fitted to a 67-year-old woman in Italy at the Careggi Hospital in 2016. The patient had a very advanced stage of Stargardt’s disease, and a total absence of peripheral and central visual fields.

STGD1 is the most common form of inherited juvenile macular degeneration with a prevalence of approximately 1 in 10,000 births.

In 2005, steroids were investigated for the treatment of macular edema due to retinal blood vessel blockage such as CRVO and BRVO.

Retinoschisis involving the central part of the retina secondary to an optic disc pit was erroneously considered to be a serous retinal detachment until correctly described by Lincoff as retinoschisis. Significant visual loss may occur and following a period of observation for spontaneous resolution, treatment with temporal peripapillary laser photocoagulation followed by vitrectomy and gas injection followed by face-down positioning is very effective in treating this condition.

While choroideremia is an ideal candidate for gene therapy there are other potential therapies that could restore vision after it has been lost later in life. Foremost of these is stem cell therapy. A clinical trial published in 2014 found that a subretinal injection of human embryonic stem cells in patients with age-related macular degeneration and Stargardt disease was safe and improved vision in most patients. Out of 18 patients, vision improved in 10, improved or remained the same in 7, and decreased in 1 patient, while no improvement was seen in the untreated eyes. The study found "no evidence of adverse proliferation, rejection, or serious ocular or systemic safety issues related to the transplanted tissue." A 2015 study used CRISPR/Cas9 to repair mutations in patient-derived induced pluripotent stem cells that cause X-linked retinitis pigmentosa. This study suggests that a patient's own repaired cells could be used for therapy, reducing the risk of immune rejection and ethical issues that come with the use of embryonic stem cells.

Gene therapy is currently not a treatment option, however human clinical trials for both choroideremia and Leber's congenital amaurosis (LCA) have produced somewhat promising results.

Clinical trials of gene therapy for patients with LCA began in 2008 at three different sites. In general, these studies found the therapy to be safe, somewhat effective, and promising as a future treatment for similar retinal diseases.

In 2011, the first gene therapy treatment for choroideremia was administered. The surgery was performed by Robert MacLaren, Professor of Ophthalmology at the University of Oxford and leader of the Clinical Ophthalmology Research Group at the Nuffield Laboratory of Ophthalmology (NLO).

In the study, 2 doses of the AAV.REP1 vector were injected subretinally in 12 patients with choroideremia.

There study had 2 objectives:

- to assess the safety and tolerability of the AAV.REP1 vector

- to observe the therapeutic benefit, or slowing of the retinal degeneration, of the gene therapy during the study and at a 24-month post-treatment time point

Despite retinal detachment caused by the injection, the study observed initial improved rod and cone function, warranting further study.

In 2016, researchers were optimistic that the positive results of 32 choroideremia patients treated over four and a half years with gene therapy in four countries could be long-lasting.

Treatment requires careful consideration of angiographic findings when a choroidal neovascular membrane is suspected which is a condition that responds to treatment. A vitreo-retinal specialist (an ophthalmologist specialized in treatment of retinal diseases) should be consulted for proper management of the case.

Presumed ocular histoplasmosis syndrome and age-related macular degeneration (AMD) have been successfully treated with laser, anti-vascular endothelial growth factors and photodynamic therapy. Ophthalmologists are using anti-vascular endothelial growth factors to treat AMD and similar conditions since research indicates that vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is one of the causes for the growth of the abnormal vessels that cause these conditions.

Macular edema sometimes occurs for a few days or weeks after cataract surgery, but most such cases can be successfully treated with NSAID or cortisone eye drops. Prophylactic use of Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs has been reported to reduce the risk of macular edema to some extent.

In 2010 the US FDA approved the use of Lucentis intravitreal injections for macular edema.

Iluvien, a sustained release intravitreal implant developed by Alimera Sciences, has been approved in Austria, Portugal and the U.K. for the treatment of vision impairment associated with chronic diabetic macular edema (DME) considered insufficiently responsive to available therapies. Additional EU country approvals are anticipated.

In 2013 Lucentis by intravitreal injection was approved by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the UK for the treatment of macular edema caused by diabetes and/or retinal vein occlusion.

On July 29, 2014, Eylea (aflibercept), an intravitreal injection produced by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc., was approved to treat DME in the United States.

CNV is conventionally treated with intravitreal injections of angiogenesis inhibitors (also known as "anti-VEGF" drugs) to control neovascularization and reduce the area of fluid below the retinal pigment epithelium. Angiogenesis inhibitors include pegaptanib, ranibizumab and bevacizumab (known by a variety of trade names, such as Macugen, Avastin or Lucentis). These inhibitors slow or stop the formation of new blood vessels (angiogenesis), typically by binding to or deactivating the transmission of vascular endothelial growth factor ('VEGF'), a signal protein produced by cells to stimulate formation of new blood vessels. The effectiveness of angiogenesis inhibitors has been shown to significantly improve visual prognosis with CNV, the recurrence rate for these neovascular areas remains high.

CNV may also be treated with photodynamic therapy coupled with a photosensitive drug such as verteporfin (Visudyne). The drug is given intravenously. It is then activated in the eye by a laser light. The drug destroys the new blood vessels, and prevents any new vessels forming by forming thrombi.

It is important to distinguish between treatment of the underlying inflammation (PIC) and the treatment of CNV.

2-pronged approach:

Treatment is not always necessary and observation may be appropriate for lesions if they are found in non-sight threatening areas (that is not centrally).

Active lesions of PIC can be treated with corticosteroids taken systemically (tablets) or regionally by injections around the eye (periorbital). It has been argued that treating lesions in this way may help minimise the development of CNV.

The treatment of CNV:

Early treatment is required for this complication. There are several possible treatment methods, but none of these treatments appears to be singly effective for the treatment of CNV.

1. Corticosteroids: systemic or intraocular

2. ‘Second line’ immunosuppressants: There is evidence that combined therapies of steroids and second line immunosuppressants may be important.

3. Surgical excision of the affected area in well selected cases.

4. Intravitreal anti-VEGF agents. Examples are bevacizumab (avastin) and ranibizumab. These relatively new drugs are injected into the eye.

5. Photodynamic therapy (PDT): A photosensitive drug is ‘activated’ by strong light. Consideration may be given to combined therapy of PDT and anti VEGF.

6. Laser photocoagulation: This is occasionally used unless the CNV is subfoveal (affecting the central or macular part of the vision). The laser treatment can damage the vision.

The use of the intravitreal anti VEGF agents namely bevacizumab and ranibizumab have been described recently. The current evidence supporting the use of anti-VEGF agents is based on retrospective case studies and could not be described as strong. However, further data from prospective controlled trials are needed before the therapeutic role of anti-VEGF therapy in the uveitis treatment regimen can be fully determined. The anti VEGF agents furthermore have not been shown to have an anti-inflammatory effect.

Thus, treatment of the underlying inflammatory disease should play a central role in the management of uveitic CNV. A two-pronged treatment that focuses on achieving control of inflammation through the use of corticosteroids and/or immunosuppressive agents, while treating

complications that arise despite adequate disease control with intravitreal anti-VEGF agents, may be useful.

Regular monitoring is essential to achieve a good outcome. This is because even if there is no active inflammation, there may still be occult CNV which requires treatment to avoid suffering vision loss.

Though there is no treatment for Cone dystrophy, certain supplements may help in delaying the progression of the disease.

The beta-carotenoids, lutein and zeaxanthin, have been evidenced to reduce the risk of developing age related macular degeneration (AMD), and may therefore provide similar benefits to Cone dystrophy sufferers.

Consuming omega-3 fatty acids (docosahexaenoic acid and eicosapentaenoic acid) has been correlated with a reduced progression of early AMD, and in conjunction with low glycemic index foods, with reduced progression of advanced AMD, and may therefore delay the progression of cone dystrophy.

This ocular pathology was first described by Iwanoff in 1865, and it has been shown to occur in about 7% of the population. It can occur more frequently in the older population with postmortem studies showing it in 2% of those aged 50 years and 20% in those aged 75 years.

Patients with optic disc drusen should be monitored periodically for ophthalmoscopy, Snellen acuity, contrast sensitivity, color vision, intraocular pressure and threshold visual fields. For those with visual field defects optical coherence tomography has been recommended for follow up of nerve fiber layer thickness. Associated conditions such as angioid streaks and retinitis pigmentosa should be screened for. Both the severity of optic disc drusen and the degree of intraocular pressure elevation have been associated with visual field loss. There is no widely accepted treatment for ODD, although some clinicians will prescribe eye drops designed to decrease the intra-ocular pressure and theoretically relieve mechanical stress on fibers of the optic disc. Rarely choroidal neovascular membranes may develop adjacent to the optic disc threatening bleeding and retinal scarring. Laser treatment or photodynamic therapy or other evolving therapies may prevent this complication.

There is no good evidence for any preventive actions, since it appears this is a natural response to aging changes in the vitreous. Posterior vitreous detachment (PVD) has been estimated to occur in over 75 per cent of the population over age 65, that PVD is essentially a harmless condition (although with some disturbing symptoms), and that it does not normally threaten sight. However, since epiretinal membrane appears to be a protective response to PVD, where inflammation, exudative fluid, and scar tissue is formed, it is possible that NSAIDs may reduce the inflammation response. Usually there are flashing light experiences and the emergence of floaters in the eye that herald changes in the vitreous before the epiretinal membrane forms g

The visual prognosis of eyes with PIC that do not develop subfoveal CNV is good. If CNV is picked up early and treated appropriately then the visual outcome can also be good. Frequent monitoring is important to ensure a good outcome. Poor vision occurs mostly with subfoveal CNV or if subretinal fibrosis (scarring) has formed.

The above information comes from a Fact sheet produced by the Uveitis Information Group May 2011. It has been factually checked by a member of the charity's Professional Medical Panel.

Usually being asymptomatic, drusen are typically found during routine eye exams where the pupils have been dilated.

Optic pits themselves do not need to be treated. However, patients should follow up with their eye care professional annually or even sooner if the patient notices any visual loss whatsoever. Treatment of PVD or serous retinal detachment will be necessary if either develops in a patient with an optic pit.

This may be present in conditions causing traction on the retina especially at the macula. This may occur in:

a) The vitreomacular traction syndrome; b) Proliferative diabetic retinopathy with vitreoretinal traction; c) Atypical cases of impending macular hole.

There is no cure for retinitis pigmentosa, but the efficacy and safety of various prospective treatments are currently being evaluated. The efficiency of various supplements, such as Vitamin A, DHA, and Lutein, in delaying disease progression remains an unresolved, yet prospective treatment option. Clinical trials investigating optic prosthetic devices, gene therapy mechanisms, and retinal sheet transplantations are active areas of study in the partial restoration of vision in retinitis pigmentosa patients.

Studies have demonstrated the delay of rod photoreceptor degeneration by the daily intake of 15000 IU (equivalent to 4.5 mg) of vitamin A palmitate; thus, stalling disease progression in some patients. Recent investigations have shown that proper vitamin A supplementation can postpone blindness by up to 10 years (by reducing the 10% loss pa to 8.3% pa) in some patients in certain stages of the disease.

The Argus retinal prosthesis became the first approved treatment for the disease in February 2011, and is currently available in Germany, France, Italy, and the UK. Interim results on 30 patients long term trials were published in 2012. The Argus II retinal implant has also received market approval in the US. The device may help adults with RP who have lost the ability to perceive shapes and movement to be more mobile and to perform day-to-day activities. In June 2013, twelve hospitals in the US announced they would soon accept consultation for patients with RP in preparation for the launch of Argus II later that year. The Alpha-IMS is a subretinal implant involving the surgical implantation of a small image-recording chip beneath the optic fovea. Measures of visual improvements from Alpha-IMS studies require the demonstration of the device's safety before proceeding with clinical trials and granting market approval.

The goal of gene therapy studies is to virally supplement retinal cells expressing mutant genes associated with the retinitis pigmentosa phenotype with healthy forms of the gene; thus, allowing the repair and proper functioning of retinal photoreceptor cells in response to the instructions associated with the inserted healthy gene. Clinical trials investigating the insertion of the healthy RPE65 gene in retinas expressing the LCA2 retinitis pigmentosa phenotype measured modest improvements in vision; however, the degradation of retinal photoreceptors continued at the disease-related rate. Likely, gene therapy may preserve remaining healthy retinal cells while failing to repair the earlier accumulation of damage in already diseased photoreceptor cells. Response to gene therapy would theoretically benefit young patients exhibiting the shortest progression of photoreceptor decline; thus, correlating to a higher possibility of cell rescue via the healthy inserted gene.