The factors affecting surgical success rate for the patients with congenital esotropia

Abstract

Objective. To evaluate the factors and preoperative clinical features affecting surgical success rate in patients with congenital esotropia. Method. The medical files of patients who underwent surgery for congenital esotropia between June 2012 and September 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Data from the patients’ full ophthalmological examination included visual acuity, ocular alignment, duction, versions and sensory tests for binocularity, cycloplegic retinoscopy and fundus evaluation. Presence of previous ambliyopia treatment, fixation preference, cross-fixation, anisometropia >1.5D, ocular motility abnormalities were noted. The relationship of these variables with the surgical success rate was evaluated. Results. A total of 48 patients (25 female,52.1%) were included. The mean age of the patients was 4.4±5.2 years. Successful surgical outcome was achieved in 39 (81.3%). All the patients were followed for 14.1±4.4 months. There was no relation between surgical success and patients’ gender, positive family history, consanguinity, previous ambliyopia treatment, anisometropia, abnormal ocular motility and cross-fixation and mean cycloplegic refraction (p>0,05). However, fixation preference and mean preoperative deviation found to be related with surgical failure (p<0,05). Conclusion. In this study many variables such as epidemiologic characteristics and clinical features of patients were investigated for their possible association with surgical success rate. Only preoperative fixation preference without ambliyopia and mean preoperative deviation were found to be risk factors for the surgical failure in this group of patients with infantile esotropia.

Keywords

• Congenital esotropia, surgical success, ambliyopia, anisometropia, fixation preference

References

1. Mohney BG, Greenberg AE, Diehl NN. Age at strabismus diagnosis in an incidence cohort of children. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007;144:467–9.
2. American Academy of Ophthalmology. Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus. San Francisco: American Academy of Ophthalmology;2006.
3. Chew E, Remaley NA, Tamboli A, Zhao J, Podgor MJ, Klebanoff M. Risk factors for esotropia and exotropia. Arch Ophthalmol. 1994;112:1349–5.
4. Rutstein R, Daum K. Anomalies of binocular vision: diagnosis and management. St. Louis, MO: Mosby Inc; 1998:205-17.
5. Scheiman MM, Wick B. Optometric management of infantile esotropia: Problems in optometry. Ped Optom 1990;2:459-79.
6. Trigler L, Siatkowski RM. Factors associated with horizontal reoperation in infantile esotropia. J AAPOS. 2002;6:15-20.
7. Vroman DT, Hutchinson AK, Saunders RA, Wilson ME. Two muscle surgery for congenital esotropia: rate of reoperation in patients with small versus large angles of deviation. J AAPOS. 2000;4:267-70.
8. Keenan JM, Willshaw HE. Outcome of strabismus surgery in congenital esotropia. Br J Ophthalmol. 1992;76:342-5.

9. Simonsz HJ, Kolling GH. Best age for surgery for infantile esotropia. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2011;15:205-8.
10. Rajavi Z, Ferdosi AA, Eslamdoust M, Yaseri M, Haftabadi N, Kroji S, Sheibani K. The prevalence of reoperation and related risk factors among patients with congenital esotropia. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2013;50:53-9.
11. Wright KW, Edelman PM, McVey JH, Terry AP, Lin M. Highgrade stereoacuity after early surgery for congenital esotropia. Arch Ophthalmol. 1994;112:913-9.
12. Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. Spontaneous resolution of earlyonset esotropia: experience of the congenital esotropia observational Study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2002;133:109-18.
13. Yusufoglu EE, Cinar FGY, Somer D, Burcu A, Akkaya ZY, Ornek F. Infantil Ezotropyada Cerrahi Basariyi Etkileyen Faktorler. Turk J Ophthalmol. 2013;43:413-8.
14. Louwagie CR, Diehl NN, Greenberg AE, Mohney BG. Long-term follow-up of congenital esotropia in a population-based cohort. J AAPOS. 2009;13:8-12.
15. Knapp P, Moore S. Diagnostic procedures in an orthoptic evaluation. Am Orthopt J. 1962;12:63-9.
16. Zipf RF. Binocular fixation pattern. Arch Ophthalmol. 1976;94:401-5.
17. Hakim OM. Association between fixation preference testing and strabismic pseudoamblyopia. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2007;44:174-7.
18. Friedman DS, Katz J, Repka MX, et al. Lack of concordance between fixation preference and HOTV optotype visual acuity in preschool children: the Baltimore Pediatric Eye Disease Study. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:1796-9.
19. Cotter SA, Tarczy-Hornoch K, Song E, et al. Fixation preference and visual acuity testing in a population-based cohort of preschool children with amblyopia risk factors. Ophthalmology. 2009;116:145-53.
20. Greenberg AE, Mohney BG, Diehl NN, Burke JP. Incidence and types of childhood esotropia: a population-based study. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:170-4.
21. Aurell E, Norrsell K. A longitudinal study of childrenwith a family history of strabismus: factors determining the incidence of strabismus. Br J Ophthalmol. 1990;74:589–94.
22. Ziakas NG, Woodruff G, Smith LK, Thompson JR. A study of heredity as a risk factor in strabismus. Eye. 2002;16:519–21.
23. Tuncbilek E. Clinical outcomes of consanguineous marriages in Turkey. Turk J Pediatr. 2001;43:277-9.
24. Bagheri M, Farvardin M, Saadat M. A study of consanguineous marriage as a risk factor for developing comitant strabismus. J Community Genet. 2015;6:177-80.
25. Castro PD, Pedroso A, Hernández L, Naranjo RM, Méndez TJ, Arias A. Results of surgery for congenital esotropia. MEDICC Rev. 2011;13:18-22. Erratum in: MEDICC Rev. 2011;13:42.