Vision Loss in ARMD

globe anatomy
anatomy of the eye (click on image to enlarge)

Why am I losing vision despite treatment for age-related macular degeneration?

            Age-related macular degeneration (ARMD) is the most common cause of visual loss in older Americans.  Vision may be lost from dry-type or wet-type ARMD: 

  • Dry-type macular degeneration is the most common type and involves the disintegration of the light-sensitive tissues in the macula.  Loss of vision is usually gradual in dry macular degeneration.  Small blind spots interfere with reading numbers in a row and all the letters of a word.  Over time, these blind spots usually enlarge and take away most of the central vision.  
  • Wet-type macular degeneration accounts for about 10% of all cases of ARMD.  It occurs in patients with dry-type ARMD when abnormal blood vessels grow under the macula and cause fluid leakage, bleeding, and scarring of the macula.  Vision loss may be rapid and severe.  Straight lines may appear distorted and the central vision appears blurred early in wet-type ARMD.  Over time, a large blind spot may develop in the center of the vision.  If one eye develops wet ARMD, there is about a 50% chance the other eye will be affected within the next five years.

            There is currently no proven drug treatment to stop dry-type ARMD.  Eye vitamins are prescribed for dry-type ARMD.  However, the main purpose of the vitamins is to stave off the start of wet-type ARMD.  Although AREDS eye vitamins appear to slow the start of blind spots in the vision from dye-type AMD, they do not slow the progression of blind spots once they start. A Meditteranean diet appears to reduce the onset and progression of blind spots from dry-type macular degeneration. Therefore, it is important to limit red meat intake to once per week, eat two servings of whole fruit per day, include fish in the diet, and rely on olive oil rather than other oils with saturated fatty acids. There are a number of on-going research studies to find a treatment to slow or prevent loss of vision from dry-type ARMD.  There is even hope for treatment to reverse the loss of vision from dry-type ARMD.  Your doctor can put you in touch with study centers if you are interested in learning more about or participating in these research studies.  Age-related macular degeneration appears to be an inherited condition.  However, it may be aggravated by factors that cause hardening of the arteries like high blood pressure, high cholesterol, overweight, physical inactivity, and tobacco use.  Efforts to control these factors may be helpful in slowing loss of vision in dry-type ARMD. 

            There are fairly good treatment options for wet-type ARMD.  Injection therapy (Avastin, Lucentis, Eylea, and Beovu) is the first-line treatment for wet-type ARMD.  Lasers are second-line treatment options.  Lasers include photocoagulation (which is rarely used currently) and Visudyne photodynamic therapy.  Treatment of wet-type ARMD is effective at slowing the loss of vision.  Unfortunately, current treatments do not completely prevent the loss of vision from ARMD.  There are several reasons why patients may continue to lose vision during treatment of ARMD:

1. Insufficient treatment

Some eyes require injection therapy every four weeks to optimal effect.  If treatment is given less often, the wet-type ARMD may progress with loss of vision that may be irreversible.  This is an important reason to continue monthly injections in some eyes (as determined by the retinal specialist).  

2. Bleeding despite treatment

Bleeding under the retina from ARMD usually results in some degree of permanent scar tissue and loss of vision.  Bleeding may occur if treatment is not given frequently enough and appears more likely in patients who take blood thinners.  Blood thinners (including aspirin) are usually prescribed to prevent heart attack or stroke.  If they are prescribed, the benefits likely outweigh the risks.  However, if blood thinners are not prescribed for a patient with ARMD, they may be best avoided to reduce the risk of bleeding from ARMD.

3. Progression of dry-type ARMD while wet-type ARMD is being treated

Many patients are not aware that ARMD always starts with the dry-type.  Wet-type ARMD develops later.  Therefore, patients with wet-type ARMD may lose vision over time even though their wet-type ARMD is well controlled.  That in, they may lose vision from a worsening of dry-type ARMD over time.  Complicating this issue is the concern that the very treatment of wet-type ARMD may, in some cases, worsen the dry-type ARMD.  

4. New eye problems develop during treatment of ARMD

The ophthalmologist will look for other problems that may cause a loss of vision unrelated to ARMD.  Common causes of vision loss include cataract, which is treatable with surgery.  Other problems include glaucoma, retinal vein occlusion, and diabetic retinopathy

What is to be done about the continued loss of vision? 

            There are a number of actions that may be taken in response to continued loss of vision during treatment of ARMD.  The retinal specialist will look for other causes of loss of vision and start appropriate treatment.  The frequency of treatment may be changed in response to changes in the retina.  Low vision aids (optical and electronic magnifiers) may be helpful.  Specially-trained social workers may help make changes in the household to make it easier to remain self-sufficient.  It is helpful to remember that the peripheral vision is rarely taken by ARMD.  Therefore, although a patient may be determined to be legally blind, total blindness is rare.  Most patients with advanced ARMD are able to ambulate and retain independence.

By Scott E Pautler, MD 

For a telemedicine consultation with Dr Pautler, please send email request to spautler@rvaf.com. We accept Medicare and most insurances in Florida. Please include contact information (including phone number) in the email. We are unable to provide consultation for those living outside the state of Florida with the exception of limited one-time consultations with residents of the following states: Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Georgia, Minnesota, and Washington.

Copyright  © 2021-2022 Designs Unlimited of Florida.  All Rights Reserved. 

Lumega-Z: Worth the cost?

What is Lumega-Z?

Lumega-Z is a vitamin/mineral/antioxidant supplement that is taken by mouth and is labelled a medical food. A medical food is simply a name used to identify a product that is taken by mouth and produced by a company for the purpose of treating disease and/or improving health.  By definition, medical food must be prescribed by a physician and not sold over-the-counter.  Lumega-Z is presumed to improve retinal health and potentially prevent or treat macular degeneration.  

What does Lumega-Z do?

Lumega-Z aims to increase the amount of protective pigment in the macula with the hope that it will be helpful in the management of macular degeneration.  Guardion is the company that makes Lumega-Z.  They state in their website: “The Company’s current focus is on the Macular Protective Pigment (“MPP”), a bio-marker and major risk factor for developing Age-Related Macular Degeneration (“AMD”) and other retinal disorders.”

I take issue with this statement.  “Macular Protective Pigment” has not been shown to be a major risk factor for AMD.  Furthermore, the company cites no clinical research (even in their website for ophthalmologists) to support their claim that clinical benefit is derived from using their product.  

Perhaps, we may assume there is benefit from Lumega-Z as another nutritional supplement (PreserVision AREDS-2) has been shown to reduce the risk of progression of macular degeneration.  However, there are no current studies to compare the effectiveness of Lugema-Z with PreserVision AREDS-2.  Alas, the company itself concludes: “Guardion Health Sciences, the maker of Lumega-Z, cannot guarantee…any vision benefit with treatment.”

What about the company that makes Lumega-Z?

Gardion’s business plan is provide medical food (a label that means their product is for medical use and must be provided via prescription) to patients with ophthalmologists who partner with Guardion (and may derive financial benefit).  Gardion’s spokesman, Dr Hovenesian, is a refractive and cataract surgeon from California. His on their medical board of directors and a shareholder.  He is not a retina specialist.  

Is Lumega-Z worth the cost?

Lumega-Z costs twice as much as Preservision AREDS-2.  However, it has not been scientifically demonstrated to be twice as good as PreserVision AREDS-2.  Indeed, it has not even been shown to be equivalent to PreserVision AREDS-2.  At the time of this publication, I am of the opinion that Lumega-Z is not worth the cost.  I currently recommend PreserVision AREDS-2 to patients with AMD at risk for loss of vision as determined by examination.  

By Scott E. Pautler, MD

For a telemedicine consultation with Dr Pautler, please send email request to spautler@rvaf.com. We accept Medicare and most insurances in Florida. Please include contact information (including phone number) in the email. We are unable to provide consultation for those living outside the state of Florida with the exception of limited one-time consultations with residents of the following states: Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Georgia, Minnesota, and Washington.

Retinal Rejuvenation

Retinal rejuvenation is a name given by the company that sells a new-generation laser machine to ophthalmologists. The laser is used to treat the retina with the hope of delaying loss of vision from age-related macular degeneration (ARMD). Although the laser company calls this treatment “retinal rejuvenation,” this name may be overstating the true effects of this new laser.

The scientific basis for the use of the laser for macular degeneration is the LEAD study. This study evaluated 292 patients with ARMD over a three-year period. Half of the eyes were treated with the new micro-pulse laser and the remainder received sham treatment for comparison. Overall, the treatment was not shown to be of benefit in slowing the loss of vision from macular degeneration. However, when looking at subsets of eyes with certain types of macular degeneration (no reticular pseudodrusen), there was a trend toward a benefit. These results, however, had a weak fragility index (meaning that more research is needed). Conversely, eyes with reticular pseudodrusen (subretinal drusenoid deposits) lost vision at a greater rate after undergoing retinal rejuvenation than those eyes that were not treated.

“Retinal rejuvenation” needs more study before it is implemented on a wide scale basis. It is currently (2018) not approved for this use in the United States. More research is needed to better establish its helpfulness in reducing the risk of vision loss from age-related macular degeneration and to identify potential risks involved with its use.

I do not recommend the “retinal rejuvenation” treatment for age-related macular degeneration by the new micro-pulse laser at this time. I look forward to more high-quality research in the future to better establish the potential role of this laser for my patients with ARMD.

By Scott E. Pautler, MD

Copyright  © 2018 Scott E Pautler MD. All rights reserved.