Journal of AAPOS : the official publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus · 2007
Aqueous drainage device surgery in refractory pediatric glaucoma: II. Ocular motility consequences.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
O'Malley Schotthoefer Erin, Yanovitch Tammy L, Freedman Sharon F
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence of complications relating to ocular motility and alignment in children with refractory congenital and aphakic glaucoma treated with aqueous drainage device surgery.
METHODS: Chart review of consecutive children treated with aqueous drainage devices at Duke University Eye Center from 1995 to 2006 for ocular motility abnormalities and strabismus as well as sensorimotor testing results before and after aqueous drainage device placement.
RESULTS: Thirty-eight eyes of 30 children with congenital glaucoma and 41 eyes of 32 children with aphakic glaucoma were included. Optotype visual acuity testing could be performed in a minority of children preoperatively. After aqueous drainage device surgery, 14 and 20 eyes, respectively, were >20/100 in the congenital glaucoma and aphakic glaucoma groups. Only a few children had stereopsis or demonstrated binocular function on Worth 4-Dot testing in both groups before and after aqueous drainage device surgery. Horizontal and vertical strabismus was common, especially after aqueous drainage device surgery and occurred in 57% of congenital glaucoma patients and 47% of aphakic glaucoma patients. Motility limitation (both vertical and horizontal) was also common and occurred in 37% overall.
DISCUSSION: Ocular motility abnormalities and strabismus were common in children after aqueous drainage device surgery. These potential problems should be considered when aqueous drainage device surgery is planned, especially in children with binocularity.
METHODS: Chart review of consecutive children treated with aqueous drainage devices at Duke University Eye Center from 1995 to 2006 for ocular motility abnormalities and strabismus as well as sensorimotor testing results before and after aqueous drainage device placement.
RESULTS: Thirty-eight eyes of 30 children with congenital glaucoma and 41 eyes of 32 children with aphakic glaucoma were included. Optotype visual acuity testing could be performed in a minority of children preoperatively. After aqueous drainage device surgery, 14 and 20 eyes, respectively, were >20/100 in the congenital glaucoma and aphakic glaucoma groups. Only a few children had stereopsis or demonstrated binocular function on Worth 4-Dot testing in both groups before and after aqueous drainage device surgery. Horizontal and vertical strabismus was common, especially after aqueous drainage device surgery and occurred in 57% of congenital glaucoma patients and 47% of aphakic glaucoma patients. Motility limitation (both vertical and horizontal) was also common and occurred in 37% overall.
DISCUSSION: Ocular motility abnormalities and strabismus were common in children after aqueous drainage device surgery. These potential problems should be considered when aqueous drainage device surgery is planned, especially in children with binocularity.