- •Foreword
- •Preface
- •Contributors
- •Contents
- •1. Epidemiology of Pediatric Strabismus
- •1.1 Introduction
- •1.2 Forms of Pediatric Strabismus
- •1.2.1 Esodeviations
- •1.2.1.1 Congenital Esotropia
- •1.2.1.2 Accommodative Esotropia
- •1.2.1.3 Acquired Nonaccommodative Esotropia
- •1.2.1.4 Abnormal Central Nervous System Esotropia
- •1.2.1.5 Sensory Esotropia
- •1.2.2 Exodeviations
- •1.2.2.1 Intermittent Exotropia
- •1.2.2.2 Congenital Exotropia
- •1.2.2.4 Abnormal Central Nervous System Exotropia
- •1.2.2.5 Sensory Exotropia
- •1.2.3 Hyperdeviations
- •1.3 Strabismus and Associated Conditions
- •1.4.1 Changes in Strabismus Prevalence
- •1.4.2 Changes in Strabismus Surgery Rates
- •1.5 Worldwide Incidence and Prevalence of Childhood Strabismus
- •1.6 Incidence of Adult Strabismus
- •References
- •2.1 Binocular Alignment System
- •2.1.2 Vergence Adaptation
- •2.1.3 Muscle Length Adaptation
- •2.2 Modeling the Binocular Alignment Control System
- •2.2.1 Breakdown of the Binocular Alignment Control System
- •2.2.4 Changes in Basic Muscle Length
- •2.2.6 Evidence Against the “Final Common Pathway”
- •2.3 Changes in Strabismus
- •2.3.1 Diagnostic Occlusion: And the Hazard of Prolonged Occlusion
- •2.3.2.1 Supporting Evidence for Bilateral Feedback Control of Muscle Lengths
- •2.4 Applications of Bilateral Feedback Control to Clinical Practice and to Future Research
- •References
- •3.1 Dissociated Eye Movements
- •3.2 Tonus and its relationship to infantile esotropia
- •3.5 Pathogenetic Role of Dissociated Eye Movements in Infantile Esotropia
- •References
- •4.1 Introduction
- •4.2.1 Binocular Correspondence: Anomalous, Normal, or Both?
- •4.3 MFS with Manifest Strabismus
- •4.3.1 Esotropia is the Most Common Form of MFS
- •4.3.2 Esotropia Allows for Better Binocular Vision
- •4.3.3 Esotropia is the Most Stable Form
- •4.4 Repairing and Producing MFS
- •4.4.1 Animal Models for the Study of MFS
- •References
- •5.1 Esotropia as the Major Type of Developmental Strabismus
- •5.1.2 Early Cerebral Damage as the Major Risk Factor
- •5.1.3 Cytotoxic Insults to Cerebral Fibers
- •5.1.5 Development of Binocular Visuomotor Behavior in Normal Infants
- •5.1.6 Development of Sensorial Fusion and Stereopsis
- •5.1.7 Development of Fusional Vergence and an Innate Convergence Bias
- •5.1.8 Development of Motion Sensitivity and Conjugate Eye Tracking (Pursuit/OKN)
- •5.1.9 Development and Maldevelopment of Cortical Binocular Connections
- •5.1.10 Binocular Connections Join Monocular Compartments Within Area V1 (Striate Cortex)
- •5.1.11 Too Few Cortical Binocular Connections in Strabismic Primate
- •5.1.12 Projections from Striate Cortex (Area V1) to Extrastriate Cortex (Areas MT/MST)
- •5.1.15 Persistent Nasalward Visuomotor Biases in Strabismic Primate
- •5.1.16 Repair of Strabismic Human Infants: The Historical Controversy
- •5.1.18 Timely Restoraion of Correlated Binocular Input: The Key to Repair
- •References
- •6. Neuroanatomical Strabismus
- •6.1 General Etiologies of Strabismus
- •6.2 Extraocular Myopathy
- •6.2.1 Primary EOM Myopathy
- •6.2.2 Immune Myopathy
- •6.2.4 Neoplastic Myositis
- •6.2.5 Traumatic Myopathy
- •6.3 Congenital Pulley Heterotopy
- •6.4 Acquired Pulley Heterotopy
- •6.5 “Divergence Paralysis” Esotropia
- •6.5.1 Vertical Strabismus Due to Sagging Eye Syndrome
- •6.5.2 Postsurgical and Traumatic Pulley Heterotopy
- •6.5.3 Axial High Myopia
- •6.6 Congenital Peripheral Neuropathy: The Congenital Cranial Dysinnervation Disorders (CCDDs)
- •6.6.1 Congenital Oculomotor (CN3) Palsy
- •6.6.3 Congenital Trochlear (CN4) Palsy
- •6.6.4 Duane’s Retraction Syndrome (DRS)
- •6.6.5 Moebius Syndrome
- •6.7 Acquired Motor Neuropathy
- •6.7.1 Oculomotor Palsy
- •6.7.2 Trochlear Palsy
- •6.7.3 Abducens Palsy
- •6.7.4 Inferior Oblique (IO) Palsy
- •6.8 Central Abnormalities of Vergence and Gaze
- •6.8.1 Developmental Esotropia and Exotropia
- •6.8.2 Cerebellar Disease
- •6.8.3 Horizontal Gaze Palsy and Progressive Scoliosis
- •References
- •7.1 Congenital Cranial Dysinnervation Disorders: Facts About Ocular Motility Disorders
- •7.1.1 The Concept of CCDDs: Ocular Motility Disorders as Neurodevelopmental Defects
- •7.1.1.1 Brainstem and Cranial Nerve Development
- •7.1.1.2 Single Disorders Representing CCDDs
- •7.1.1.3 Disorders Understood as CCDDs
- •7.2 Congenital Cranial Dysinnervation Disorders: Perspectives to Understand Ocular Motility Disorders
- •7.2.1.1 Brown Syndrome
- •Motility Findings
- •Saccadic Eye Movements
- •Comorbidity
- •Epidemiologic Features
- •Laterality
- •Sex Distribution
- •Incidence
- •Heredity
- •Potential Induction of the Syndrome
- •Radiologic Findings
- •Natural Course in Brown Syndrome
- •Intra-and Postoperative Findings
- •References
- •8.1 Amblyopia
- •8.2 What Is Screening?
- •8.2.1 Screening for Amblyopia, Strabismus, and/or Refractive Errors
- •8.2.1.1 Screening for Amblyopia
- •8.2.1.2 Screening for Strabismus
- •8.2.1.3 Screening for Refractive Error
- •8.2.1.4 Screening for Other Ocular Conditions
- •8.3 Screening Tests for Amblyopia, Strabismus, and/or Refractive Error
- •8.3.1 Vision Tests
- •8.3.3 Stereoacuity
- •8.3.4 Photoscreening and/or Autorefraction
- •8.3.6 Who Should Administer the Screening Program?
- •8.4 Treatment of Amblyopia
- •8.4.1 Type of Treatment
- •8.4.2 Refractive Adaptation
- •8.4.3 Conventional Occlusion
- •8.4.4 Pharmacological Occlusion
- •8.4.5 Optical Penalization
- •8.4.7 Treatment Compliance
- •8.4.8 Other Treatment Options for Amblyopia
- •8.4.9 Recurrence of Amblyopia Following Therapy
- •8.5 Quality of Life
- •8.5.1 The Impact of Amblyopia Upon HRQoL
- •8.5.3 Reading Speed and Reading Ability in Children with Amblyopia
- •8.5.4 Impact of Amblyopia Upon Education
- •8.5.6 The Impact of Strabismus Upon HRQoL
- •8.5.7 Critique of HRQoL Issues in Amblyopia
- •8.5.8 The Impact of the Condition or the Impact of Treatment?
- •References
- •9. The Brückner Test Revisited
- •9.1 Amblyopia and Amblyogenic Disorders
- •9.1.1 Early Detection of Amblyopia
- •9.1.2 Brückner’s Original Description
- •9.2.1 Physiology
- •9.2.2 Performance
- •9.2.3 Shortcomings and Pitfalls
- •9.3.1 Physiology
- •9.3.2 Performance
- •9.3.3 Possibilities and Limitations
- •9.4.1 Physiology
- •9.4.2 Performance
- •9.4.3 Possibilities and Limitations
- •9.5 Eye Movements with Alternating Illumination of the Pupils
- •References
- •10. Amblyopia Treatment 2009
- •10.1 Amblyopia Treatment 2009
- •10.1.1 Introduction
- •10.1.2 Epidemiology
- •10.1.3 Clinical Features of Amblyopia
- •10.1.4 Diagnosis of Amblyopia
- •10.1.5 Natural History
- •10.2 Amblyopia Management
- •10.2.1 Refractive Correction
- •10.2.2 Occlusion by Patching
- •10.2.3 Pharmacological Treatment with Atropine
- •10.2.4 Pharmacological Therapy Combined with a Plano Lens
- •10.3 Other Treatment Issues
- •10.3.1 Bilateral Refractive Amblyopia
- •10.3.3 Maintenance Therapy
- •10.4 Other Treatments
- •10.4.1 Filters
- •10.4.2 Levodopa/Carbidopa Adjunctive Therapy
- •10.5 Controversy
- •10.5.1 Optic Neuropathy Rather than Amblyopia
- •References
- •11.1 Introduction
- •11.1.2 Sensory or Motor Etiology
- •11.1.4 History
- •11.1.5 Outcome Parameters
- •11.2 Outcome of Surgery in the ELISSS
- •11.2.1 Reasons for the ELISSS
- •11.2.2 Summarized Methods of the ELISSS
- •11.2.3 Summarized Results of the ELISSS
- •11.2.4 Binocular Vision at Age Six
- •11.2.5 Horizontal Angle of Strabismus at Age Six
- •11.2.6 Alignment is Associated with Binocular Vision
- •11.3 Number of Operations and Spontaneous Reduction into Microstrabismus Without Surgery
- •11.3.1 The Number of Operations Per Child and the Reoperation Rate in the ELISSS
- •11.3.2 Reported Reoperation Rates
- •11.3.3 Test-Retest Reliability Studies
- •11.3.6 Spontaneous Reduction of the Angle
- •11.3.7 Predictors of Spontaneous Reduction into Microstrabismus
- •Appendix
- •References
- •12.1 Overview
- •12.1.2 Manifest Latent Nystagmus (MLN)
- •12.1.2.1 Clinical Characteristics of Manifest Latent Nystagmus (MLN)
- •12.1.3 Congenital Periodic Alternating Nystagmus (PAN)
- •12.1.3.1 Clinical characteristics of congenital periodic alternating nystagmus
- •12.2 Compensatory Mechanisms
- •12.2.1 Dampening by Versions
- •12.2.2 Dampening by Vergence
- •12.2.3 Anomalous Head Posture (AHP)
- •12.2.3.4 Measurement of AHP
- •12.2.3.6 Testing AHP at Near
- •12.3 Treatment
- •12.3.1 Optical Treatment
- •12.3.1.1 Refractive Correction
- •12.3.1.2 Spectacles and Contact Lenses (CL)
- •12.3.1.3 Prisms
- •12.3.1.4 Low Visual Aids
- •12.3.2 Medication
- •12.3.3 Acupuncture
- •12.3.4 Biofeedback
- •12.3.6 Surgical Treatment of Congenital Nystagmus
- •12.3.6.1 Management of Horizontal AHP
- •12.3.6.2 Management of Vertical AHP
- •12.3.6.3 Management of Head Tilt
- •Retro-Equatorial Recession of Horizontal Rectus Muscles
- •The Tenotomy Procedure
- •References
- •13.1 Dissociated Deviations
- •13.2 Surgical Alternatives to Treat Patients with DVD
- •13.2.1 Symmetric DVD with Good Bilateral Visual Acuity, with No Oblique Muscles Dysfunction
- •13.2.2 Bilateral DVD with Deep Unilateral Amblyopia
- •13.2.3 DVD with Inferior Oblique Overaction (IOOA) and V Pattern
- •13.2.4 DVD with Superior Oblique Overaction (SOOA) and A Pattern
- •13.2.5 Symmetric vs. Asymmetric Surgeries for DVD
- •13.3 Dissociated Horizontal Deviation
- •13.4 Dissociated Torsional Deviation. Head tilts in patients with Dissociated Strabismus
- •13.5 Conclusions
- •References
- •14.1 Introduction
- •14.2 Clinical and Theoretical Investigations
- •References
- •15.1 General Principles of Surgical Treatment in Paralytic Strabismus
- •15.1.1 Aims of Treatment
- •15.1.2 Timing of Surgery
- •15.1.3 Preoperative Assessment
- •15.1.4 Methods of Surgical Treatment
- •15.2 Third Nerve Palsy
- •15.2.1 Complete Third Nerve Palsy
- •15.2.2 Incomplete Third Nerve Palsy
- •15.3 Fourth Nerve Palsy
- •15.4 Sixth Nerve Palsy
- •References
- •16.1 Graves Orbitopathy (GO): Pathogenesis and Clinical Signs
- •16.1.1 Graves Orbitopathy is Part of a Systemic Disease: Graves Disease (GD)
- •16.1.2 Graves Orbitopathy−Clinical Signs
- •16.1.2.1 Clinical Changes Result in Typical Symptoms
- •16.1.3 Clinical Examination of GO
- •16.1.3.1 Signs of Activity
- •16.1.3.2 Assessing Severity of GO
- •16.1.3.3 Imaging
- •16.2 Natural History
- •16.3 Treatment of GO
- •16.3.1.1 Glucocorticoid Treatment
- •16.3.1.2 Orbital Radiotherapy
- •16.3.1.3 Combined Therapy: Glucocorticoids and Orbital Radiotherapy
- •16.3.1.4 Other Immunosuppressive Treatments and New Developments
- •16.3.2 Inactive Disease Stages
- •16.3.2.1 Orbital Decompression
- •16.3.2.2 Extraocular Muscle Surgery
- •16.3.2.3 Lid Surgery
- •16.4 Thyroid Dysfunction and GO
- •16.5.1 Relationship Between Cigarette Smoking and Graves Orbitopathy
- •16.5.2 Genetic Susceptibility
- •16.6 Special Situations
- •16.6.1 Euthyroid GO
- •16.6.2 Childhood GO
- •16.6.3 GO and Diabetes
- •References
is approximately 12–18 months of age, and in many European countries, surgery for IE is performed at the age of 2 or 3 years. There has been a call recently for surgery within 2 months of the onset of esotropia [36]. However, there have been no randomized studies with prospectively assigned early-surgery and late-surgery groups and an evaluation according to intention-to- treat. Elliot and Shafiq [37] concluded in their Cochrane review: “As there are no randomised controlled trials in the area at present, it has not been possible to resolve the controversies regarding … age of intervention in patients with IE. … There is clearly a need for good quality trials to be conducted in various areas of IE, in order to improve the evidence base for the management of this condition.”
Indeed, one cannot exclude the possibility that in the retrospective case-series studies, without a control group, an occasional child may have been operated that would have straightened to 60˝ stereopsis without surgery. Three such cases occurred in the first prospective study by Birch et al. [27] and two in the ELISSS.
Therefore, instead of providing the reader with a quick recipe on whether to operate early or late, it seems more appropriate to list and discuss the outcome measures that should be considered when contemplating early, very early, or late surgery in a specific child. The primary outcome measures are the following:
1.The binocular vision conserved or regained by early surgery.
2.The angle of strabismus after surgery and the longterm stability of alignment.
3.The number of operations to reach these goals or the chance of spontaneous reduction of the strabismus into a microstrabismus without surgery.
There are other outcome parameters that should be considered. For instance, the child’s psychological and motor development, and bonding between infant and parents may be improved by early surgery. These need evaluation within disciplines other than pediatric ophthalmology, however.
Endophthalmitis after strabismus surgery [38] occurs preferentially in first surgery in children under 6 years of age, but it is not yet clear whether its prevalence in young children di ers from that in very young children. Finally, general anesthesia may not be without risk in young children. As a case in point, in a recent population-based, retrospective birth cohort study, general anesthesia before the age of 4 years was significantly correlated with learning disability [39].
11.2 Outcome of Surgery in the ELISSS |
139 |
Summary for the Clinician
■IE may have many causes, ranging from motor to sensory. Whatever its cause, whether sensory or motor, the end state of untreated IE is characterized by lack of binocular vision. If its cause is motor, loss of binocular vision can, in principle, be limited by early surgery.
■Primary outcome measures of surgery are (1) binocular vision, (2) the angle and long-term stability of alignment, and (3) the number of operations or the chance of spontaneous reduction of the strabismus into microstrabismus without surgery.
11.2Outcome of Surgery in the ELISSS
11.2.1Reasons for the ELISSS
Early surgery may minimize further loss of the remaining binocular vision. The first prospective study of surgery for IE Birch et al. [27] reported 35% random dot stereopsis (disparity 400˝ or better) among 84 children operated at approximately 8.5 months. Sixty-three were aligned within 5.7°. The average number of operations was 1.5. Three were not operated and had full stereopsis.After this first prospective study of surgery for IE had been published, the need was felt in Europe for a large, prospective, controlled multicenter trial comparing early surgery for IE with late surgery.
11.2.2Summarized Methods of the ELISSS
In the ELISSS, all children with IE were included who first presented to one of the participating clinics. The ELISSS study committee considered randomization impossible, because it was anticipated that the parents would not cooperate: One first would have had to inform the parents of the possibility of surgery next week, only to postpone surgery for 2 years when the randomization procedure prescribed late surgery [40]. Instead, each of the participating clinics chose beforehand whether to operate all of their eligible patients in the recruitment period either early or late. Recruited children received an extensive baseline examination at 6–18 months of age, were assigned to early surgery (6–24 months) or late surgery (32–60 months), and were assessed at the age of 6 years. All children who first presented with convergent IE between 5 and 30° were included. However,
140 |
11 Best Age for Surgery for Infantile Esotropia |
children with preor dysmaturity, nystagmus, nervous system deficit, retardation, dysmorphia or motility disorders other than upor downshoot in adduction, V- or A-pattern, or limitation of abduction were excluded.
11 Following recruitment, the angle of strabismus, refraction, degree of amblyopia, and limitation of abduction were assessed in an extensive baseline examination, based on a test–retest reliability study [41]. Orthoptic examinations, including angle and refraction, were repeated every 6 months. Cases with strongly established fixation preference and/or significant anisometropia underwent appropriate and e ective occlusion therapy to the point of near spontaneous alternation and central fixation of the worse eye. Reoperation was undertaken in cases with a residual esotropia of greater than 10°, or in case of overcorrection. Children were evaluated at the age of 6 years in the presence of independent observers. Endpoints were level of binocular vision, manifest angle of strabismus at distance fixation, remaining amblyopia, number of operations, vertical strabismus, angle at near, and influence of surgical technique.
11.2.3Summarized Results of the ELISSS
A total of 58 clinics in 13 countries recruited 532 children: 231 children at the age of 11.1 SD 3.7 months (baseline) for early surgery and 301 at the age of 10.9 SD 3.7 months for late surgery. An additional 442 patients screened for inclusion were excluded for various reasons, like prematurity (32), congenital nystagmus (49), or nervous system deficit (99). No di erences between groups were found in the baseline examination apart from a slightly larger angle in the early group [42]. Of 532 patients, 414 were evaluated at the age of 6 years in the presence of independent observers (82.7% of all forms were signed by the independent observer). Dropout rates were 26.0% in the early and 22.3% in the late group, but no di erences existed between dropouts and completers in the baseline examination, and clinics with many dropouts did not have better results. The final examinations were performed at the age of 6.8 SD 0.8 years, on average, in the early group and 6.8 SD 0.7 years in the late group. The interval between the last operation and the final examination was 4.4 SD 1.5 years in 157 children from the early group, and 2.3 SD 1.1 years in 187 children from the late group. The number of orthoptic examinations in the early group was 11.3 SD 5.2 per patient, including all children who later became dropouts; in the late group, it was 11.4 SD 4.6.
|
60 |
|
patients |
50 |
|
operatedand |
40 |
|
unoperatedfor |
||
20 |
||
|
30 |
|
Percentage |
10 |
|
|
||
|
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
||||
|
|
|
|
early |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
late |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
Degree of binocular vision |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
Fig. 11.1 Binocular vision at the age of 6 years after early or late surgery, stratified according to whether the children had been operated (black) or not (white) at the age of 6 years.Categories:(1) Bagolini negative, (2) Bagolini positive, (3) Housefly positive, (4) Titmus circles 200˝–140˝, (5) Titmus circles 100˝–40˝, (6) all figures of Lang Test or TNO 480˝ and 240˝, (7) TNO 120˝–15˝ (See Ref. [57])
11.2.4Binocular Vision at Age Six
At the age of 6 years, 51.2% of the early vs. 44.7% of the late group recognized Bagolini striated glasses, and 13.5% of the early vs. 3.9% (P = 0.001) of the late group recognized the Titmus Housefly; 3.0% of the early and 3.9% of the late group had stereopsis beyond Titmus Housefly (Fig. 11.1). Some children had been operated beyond the set time frame (6–18 and 32–60 months), but “as treated” analysis yielded the same result.
11.2.5Horizontal Angle of Strabismus at Age Six
At the age of 6 years, the manifest horizontal angle during fixation at distance was 2.15° SD 5.45° in the early group (N = 167) and 3.21° SD 6.29° in the late group (N = 231), wearing full refractive correction. Surprisingly, 35.1% of
11.2 Outcome of Surgery in the ELISSS |
141 |
Percentage for unoperated and operated patients
40
|
|
30 |
30 |
|
|
|
strabismus |
20 |
|
10 |
|
20 |
of |
|
angle |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
Horizontal |
|
10 |
–10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
–20 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
< < < < < < < < < < > |
–10 |
0 |
10 |
20 |
30 |
40 |
||||
< < < < < < < < < < > |
|||||||||||||||
= = |
= |
= = = |
24 |
= = |
= |
= = = |
24 |
||||||||
− − − |
0 4 8 |
=12=16=20=24 |
− − − 0 4 |
8 |
=12=16=20=24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
12 |
8 |
4 |
|
|
12 |
8 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
early |
|
|
|
late |
|
|
|
Horizontal angle of strabismus at baseline |
|
|||
|
|
|
Horizontal angle of strabismus (deg) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Fig. 11.2 (Left) Manifest horizontal angle of strabismus in degrees for both groups at the final examination at the age of 6 years (N = 414), stratified according to whether the children had been operated (black) or not (white). (Right) Relationship between horizontal angle at approximately 11 months and horizontal angle at the age of 6 years. Note that the variation of the horizontal angle of strabismus at approximately 11 months was similar to that at the age of 6 years. Note that one dot may represent more children (See Ref. [57])
the early-surgery group and 34.8% of the late-surgery group were not aligned within 0–10°, despite the fact that the protocol prescribed to continue surgery until alignment within 0–10° had been reached. Many children had a small exotropia (especially in the early group), but in other cases, a large esotropia existed that had not been considered a priority by the parents in the period preceding the final examination. It was also surprising that the variation of the angle of strabismus at age 6 was equal to its variation at baseline at 11 months (Fig. 11.2). These findings underscore that surgery for IE is elective and, as clinicians, we primarily see patients while they are being treated by us until they are straight.
11.2.6Alignment is Associated with Binocular Vision
Children with at least Titmus Housefly stereopsis were better aligned (Fig. 11.3). Better alignment in case of better binocular vision has been found by Birch et al. [43] and Fu et al. [44]. In the study “Randomized comparison of bilateral recession vs. unilateral recession-resection for
IE” [45] among older children, 38.4% of the children had a positive Bagolini test postoperatively, although all children with any form of binocular vision preoperatively had been excluded. These children had significantly better ocular alignment, which may have been either a cause or a consequence of the gain of binocular vision.
Summary for the Clinician
■In the ELISSS, children with IE operated around the age of 20 months, achieved Bagolini striated glasses or Titmus Housefly stereopsis more frequently as compared to those operated around the age of 49 months.
■No di erence was found, however, for stereopsis beyond Titmus Housefly.
■Alignment was similar after early surgery, as compared to that after late surgery, but a large variation of the angle of strabismus was found at the age of 6 years in both groups.
■Children with stereopsis were aligned better,which may have been either a cause or a consequence of the gain of binocular vision.
