Campos (1982a) reported on his psychophysical studies on the binocularity of patients with comitant strabismus. With binocular visual field techniques, it was possible to show that patients with small-angle eso- and exotropia exhibit a binocular vision, without suppression of the deviated eye. In the present paper visual electrophysiology is used objectively these findings and to provide more insight in the problem. First, the studies on binocularity in normals and strabismics, done by using visual evoked responses (VER) are reviewed. This type of investigation is relatively new and the results of the literature are still conflicting. Then personal results of the authors are reported. It is shown that with VER it is possible to objectively assess the presence of anomalous binocular vision (ABV) sustained by anomalous retinal correspondence (ARC) in small-angle strabismus. In patients with large angle deviations this type of binocularity is absent. A correlation between psychophysical and electrophysiological data is provided. Lastly a simple method is described for differentiating the binocularity of normals from that of Strabismics with ARC. This method is based on the recording of binocular VER with the anteposition in front of the fixing eye of neutral filters of increasing density.

Ten normal subjects and 14 patients with comitant esotropia were examined by means of pattern visual evoked responses (VER) under monocular and binocular viewing conditions. When both eyes were stimulated together a VER summation was noted both in normals and in strabismics with small-angle deviation and anomalous retinal correspondence (ARC). This is considered as an objective proof of binocularity. Patients with large-angle strabismus and/or suppression of the image of the deviated eye did not show summation. The significance of summation and its relationship with binocular vision was analyzed by recording binocular VER in normals in which diplopia was artificially induced and in strabismics who spontaneously exhibited double vision. A simple way for differentiating normals from strabismics by means of VERs is presented, considering that the presence or absence of summation per se does not achieve this result. This method is based on the anteposition in front of the fixing eye of neutral filters of increasing density. Summation disappears in strabismics with much weaker filters than in normals (0.5 versus 1.6 log. unit).

Both the age-related trend in the spherical equivalent and the high hyperopic values of the distribution peak in patients with esodeviation confirm the importance of the hypermetropic refractive component. The statistically significantly higher incidence of astigmatism in patients with 1.00 D or greater ametropia highlights its incidence in amblyopia.

Lathosterolosis may lead to dysmetabolic cataract development; this unique case of cataract in such a patient has been successfully managed with surgery. Clinical results were excellent, and no complications occurred either intra- or postoperatively.

The most widely-used techniques for testing visual function in babies are reviewed. Advantages and limitations of optokinetic nystagmus testing, visual evoked responses and preferential looking techniques are considered. The theoretical basis and the clinical applicability of those techniques are outlined. Other simple methods are considered as well, which allow practicing ophthalmologists to assess the presence or absence of vision in babies. The importance of early diagnosis for prevention and treatment of visual deficits in babies is stressed.