Although patients with CFEOM present significant strabismus surgical challenges because of EOM dysinnervation, fibrosis, and/or heterotopia, satisfactory alignment and improvement of the head posture can be attained in a significant proportion of patients using an individually tailored surgical approach.
Aims:To evaluate the utility of margin-reflex distance (MRD) as an alternative to levator function (LF) in choosing the appropriate surgical procedure for congenital blepharoptosis.Settings and Design:This was a retrospective, observational study.Subjects and Methods:Records of patients with simple (dystrophic) congenital ptosis who were operated and followed for ≥6 months postoperatively and whose outcomes were deemed as successful were evaluated in the study. Success was defined as a MRD at the last postoperative visit of ≥3 mm. In all cases, levator resection was performed when LF was >4 mm and frontalis suspension when LF was ≤4 mm.Statistical Analysis Used:For statistical evaluations, LF was accepted as the gold standard parameter for deciding on the surgical intervention, and the optimum cutoff point for initial MRD was determined as the point at which sensitivity and specificity was highest at the receiving operating curve for the selection of surgical procedure.Results:Of one hundred and three eyes of ninety patients (44 female/46 male), levator resection was used in 44.7% and frontalis suspension in 55.3%. When the optimum cutoff point for MRD was determined as 0.5 mm, the sensitivity was 71%, specificity was 86%, and the area under the curve that represented the discriminative power of this parameter was found to be 0.826.Conclusion:The MRD at the cutoff point of 0.5 mm may be used as an alternative to LF to determine the type of surgical intervention in patients with congenital blepharoptosis whose LF cannot be reliably obtained in clinical evaluations.
Purpose: To evaluate the overall frequency of visual function loss in pediatric patients with congenital blepharoptosis. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted in a tertiary center. The clinical records of patients younger than 18 years who were diagnosed as having congenital blephroptosis, underwent surgery, and had at least 1 year of postoperative follow-up were evaluated. Visual acuity results, presence of structural eye abnormalities, presence and type of amblyopia and strabismus, and refractive errors were recorded. The Mann–Whitney U test, chi-square test, and stepwise regression analysis were used for statistical analyses. Results: The mean final visual acuity was 0.11 ± 0.23 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) (range: 0.0 to 1.0 logMAR) at the final follow-up visit for 143 eyes of 123 patients (65 male and 58 female). In this cohort, 30 patients (24.4%) had amblyopia and 5 patients (4.1%) had visual loss related to structural eye pathology, amounting to a total of 35 patients (28.5%) with visual function loss. The mean final visual acuities of patients without amblyopia, patients with amblyopia, and patients with organic eye disorders were 0.01 ± 0.03, 0.29 ± 0.28, and 0.55 ± 0.42 logMAR, respectively. Severe blepharoptosis (≥ 4 mm) was present in 25 patients (83.3%) with amblyopia. Deprivational amblyopia was detected in 25 of 36 eyes (69.4%) with amblyopia. Independent risk factors associated with final visual acuity were presence of amblyopia at presentation (correlation coefficient [ß] ± standard error [SE] = −0.29 ± 0.04; P < .001), anisometropia (ß ± SE = −0.27 ± 0.06; P < .001), and ptosis severity (ß ± SE = −0.09 ± 0.04; P = .012). Visual impairment (visual acuity < 20/40) persisted in 11.9% of eyes at the final follow-up. Conclusions: Visual function loss was present in one-third of pediatric patients with congenital blepharoptosis. Both amblyopia and structural eye disorders contribute to visual impairment in this patient population. Structural eye pathology contributes independently to 4.1% of visual loss in this clinical setting. [ J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus . 2020;57(2):97–102.]
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.