Journal List > J Korean Ophthalmol Soc > v.51(12) > 1008711

Jin, Park, and Lee: Changes of Deviation After the Patch and +3.00 Diopter Spherical Lens Test in Basic Intermittent Exotropia

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the change of deviation angle after the patch test and +3.00 diopter (D) spherical lens test in basic intermittent exotropia.

Methods

The present study included 57 patients diagnosed with basic intermittent exotropia. The deviation angles at near and far before and after monocular occlusion of 40 minutes or more were measured. Afterward, change of deviation was also measured by placing +3.00 D spherical lenses at near.

Results

Results from the study revealed pre-occlusion mean deviation angles of 23.1 ± 7.41 prism diopters (PD) at near, and 23.9 ± 6.56 PD at far. After the patch test, the mean deviation angles were increased to 28.3 ± 6.50 PD (p < 0.0001) at near, and 25.5 ± 6.40 PD (p < 0.0001) at far. After the +3.00 D spherical lens test, the angle was increased to 31.5 ± 7.53 PD (p < 0.0001) at near. Using the gradient method, the average accommodation convergence – accommodation ratio was 1.4 ± 1.19 PD/D.

Conclusions

Both the patch test and +3.00 D spherical lens test significantly increased the deviation angles at near and far, they helped to find the maximum deviation angle in patients with basic intermittent exotropia.

References

1. Von Noorden GK. Binocular Vision and Ocular Motility. Theory and Management of Strabismus. 6th ed.St Louis: CV Mosby;2002. chap. 17.
2. Hardesty HH, Boynton JR, Keenan JP. Treatment of intermittent exotropia. Arch Ophthalmol. 1978; 96:268–74.
crossref
3. Parks MM. Ocular Motility and Strabismus. Hagerstown, Md: Harper & Row;1975. p. 113–22.
4. Burian HM, Spivey BE. The surgical management of exodeviations. Am J Ophthalmol. 1965; 59:603–20.
5. Fletcher MC, Silverman SJ. Strabismus parts. A summary of 1110 consecutive cases. Am J Ophthalmol. 1966; 61:86–94.
6. Marlowe FW. Prolonged occlusion as a test for muscle balance. Am J Ophthalmol. 1921; 4:238–50.
7. Kushner BJ, Morton GV. Diagnostic occlusion in strabismus management. J Ocul Ther Surg. 1983; 2:194–200.
8. Kushner BJ. Diagnosis and treatment of exotropia with a high accommodation convergence-accommodation ratio. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999; 117:221–4.
crossref
9. Kim SH, Kim SY, Kwon J-Y. Change of deviation angle after monocular occlusion in intermittent exotropia. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2005; 46:1175–82.
10. Jang SY, Lee J-Y, Park SH, Kim SY. The meaning of monocular occlusion on preoperative evaluation in basic intermittent exotropia. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2009; 50:1371–6.
crossref
11. Jung YG, Kim SH, Cho YA. The changes of exodeviation according to distance and after patching of deviated eye for 1 hour in intermittent exotropia. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2004; 45:1128–33.
12. Arnoldi KA, Reynolds JD. Assessment of amplitude and control of the distance deviation in intermittent exotropia. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2008; 45:150–3.
crossref
13. Scobee RG. The Oculorotary Muscles. 2nd ed.St Louis: aberrations Book;1952.
14. Kushner BJ, Morton GV. Distance/near differences in intermittent exotropia. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998; 116:478–86.
crossref
15. Kushner BJ. The distance angle to target in surgery for intermittent exotropia. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998; 116:189–94.
crossref
16. Kushner BJ. Exotropic deviations: a functional classification and approach to treatment. Am Orthopt J. 1988; 38:81–93.
crossref
17. Cooper EL. Purposeful overcorrection in exotropia. In: Kanger S. Giessen, eds.International strabismus symposium. 1966. 311–8.
crossref
18. Scott WE, Keech R, Mash AJ. The postoperative results and stability of exodeviations. Arch Ophthalmol. 1981; 99:1814–8.
crossref
19. Wright KW, Spiegel PH. Exotropia. In Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus. 2nd ed.New York: Springer;2003. chap. 14.

Table 1.
Characteristics of study group
Number of patients 57
Male / Female 27 / 30
Age of patients (Mean ± SD*, yr) 8.3 ± 2.32
Refractive error (Mean ± SD*, diopters, OD/OS) −1.51 ± 1.85 / −1.48 ± 1.60

* SD = standard deviation

OD = oculus dexter

OS = oculus sinister.

Table 2.
Mean deviation after occlusion and +3.00 D spherical lens test
Deviation angle (PD*) Near Distance
Pre-occlusion 23.1 ± 7.41 23.9 ± 6.56
Post-occlusion 28.3 ± 6.50 25.5 ± 6.40
Post +3.00 D lens test 31.5 ± 7.53

* PD = prism diopters.

Table 3.
Comparison of mean angle increment in study group
Deviation angle (PD*) Near
Distance
Responder Non-responder Responder Non-responder
Post-occlusion 8.5 ± 4.05 0.8 ± 2.83 6.1 ± 1.76 0.8 ± 2.01
Post +3.00 D lens test 7.4 ± 2.62 0.8 ± 2.83 −0.1 ± 2.47

* PD = prism diopters

Responder = angle of deviation increased by 5 PD or more after monocular occlusion and +3.00 D spherical lens test

Non-responder = angle of deviation increased by 4 PD or less after monocular occlusion and +3.00 D spherical lens test.

Table 4.
Comparison of mean age in study group
Age (Mean ± SD*, yr) Near
Distance
Responder Non-responder Responder Non-responder
Post-occlusion 8.2 ± 2.11 8.4 ± 2.61 7.9 ± 2.47 8.4 ± 2.31
Post +3.00 D lens test 8.6 ± 2.47 8.0 ± 2.19

* SD = standard deviation

Responder = angle of deviation increased by 5 PD or more after monocular occlusion and +3.00 D spherical lens test

Non-responder = angle of deviation increased by 4 PD or less after monocular occlusion and +3.00 D spherical lens test.

Table 5.
Comparison of mean refractive error in study group
Refractive error (Mean ± SD*, diopters, OD/OS) Near
Distance
Responder§ Non-responderΠ Responder§ Non-responderΠ
Post-occlusion −1.58 ± 1.94 / −1.39 ± 1.74 / −1.20 ± 1.66 / −1.58 ± 1.91 /
−1.51 ± 1.61 −1.41 ± 1.63 −1.21 ± 1.91 −1.54 ± 1.55
Post +3.00 D lens test −1.56 ± 1.77 / −1.47 ± 1.95 /
−1.56 ± 1.76 −1.41 ± 1.50

* SD = standard deviation

OD = oculus dexter

OS = oculus sinister

§ Responder = angle of deviation increased by 5 PD or more after monocular occlusion and +3.00 D spherical lens test

Π Non-responder = angle of deviation increased by 4 PD or less after monocular occlusion and +3.00 D spherical lens test.

TOOLS
Similar articles