Holmes Jonathan M, Birch Eileen E, Leske David A, Fu Valeria L, Mohney Brian G
Department of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Ophthalmology. 2007 Jun;114(6):1215-20. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.06.066. Epub 2007 Jan 22.
Poor control of intermittent exotropia has been considered an indication for surgical intervention, and poor distance stereoacuity may be an indicator of poor control. Two new measures of distance stereoacuity, the Frisby-Davis Distance test (FD2) and Distance Randot test (DR), both of which have been validated in normal and strabismic subjects, were evaluated, and we compared stereoacuity with scores on a recently described control scale.
Prospective case series.
Twenty-five consecutive patients with intermittent exotropia.
Office-based control was graded at distance and near on a 0 to 5 scale, and distance control ranged from 1 (recovery in 1-5 seconds after monocular occlusion) to 4 (>50% spontaneously tropic). Stereoacuity was measured using the FD2 and DR at distance and the Preschool Randot and Frisby tests at near.
Distance stereoacuity measured using the FD2 and DR.
Measurable distance stereoacuity thresholds in intermittent exotropia were poor with the DR and excellent with the FD2 (medians, nil and 40''; P<0.0001). Near stereoacuity was excellent with both the Preschool Randot and Frisby (medians, 60'' and 60''; P = 0.99). There was poor correlation between distance control score and either FD2 (r(s) = 0.1, P = 0.6) or DR (r(s) = 0.3, P = 0.2). Control scores correlated with magnitude of deviation at distance (r(s) = 0.5, P = 0.02) and near (r(s) = 0.5, P = 0.01).
The real-world contour-based targets of the new distance FD2 appear to stimulate fusion in intermittent exotropia, even when distance control is poor. In contrast, the new Polaroid vectograph-based DR is very sensitive to disturbances of binocularity. Two new distance stereoacuity tests appear sensitive to opposite ends of the intermittent exotropia spectrum; FD2 performance deteriorates when the patient is constantly tropic, whereas DR performance deteriorates at the earliest stages of intermittency.
间歇性外斜视控制不佳一直被视为手术干预的指征,而远距离立体视锐度差可能是控制不佳的一个指标。我们评估了两种新的远距离立体视锐度测量方法,即弗里斯比 - 戴维斯远距离测试(FD2)和远距离兰多测试(DR),这两种方法在正常受试者和斜视受试者中均已得到验证,并且我们将立体视锐度与最近描述的一种控制量表的得分进行了比较。
前瞻性病例系列研究。
连续25例间歇性外斜视患者。
在远距离和近距离以0至5级对门诊控制情况进行分级,远距离控制范围从1(单眼遮挡后1 - 5秒恢复)到4(>50%自发斜视)。使用FD2和DR测量远距离立体视锐度,使用学龄前兰多测试和弗里斯比测试测量近距离立体视锐度。
使用FD2和DR测量的远距离立体视锐度。
在间歇性外斜视中,使用DR测量的可测量远距离立体视锐度阈值较差,而使用FD2测量的则非常好(中位数分别为无和40'';P<0.0001)。使用学龄前兰多测试和弗里斯比测试测量的近距离立体视锐度都很好(中位数分别为60''和60'';P = 0.99)。远距离控制得分与FD2(r(s)=0.1,P = 0.6)或DR(r(s)=0.3,P = 0.2)之间的相关性都很差。控制得分与远距离(r(s)=0.5,P = 0.02)和近距离(r(s)=0.5,P = 0.01)的斜视度相关。
新的基于现实世界轮廓的远距离FD2似乎能在间歇性外斜视中刺激融合,即使在远距离控制不佳时也是如此。相比之下,新的基于宝丽来矢量图的DR对双眼视功能的干扰非常敏感。两种新的远距离立体视锐度测试似乎对间歇性外斜视谱的两端敏感;当患者持续斜视时,FD2的表现会变差,而DR的表现在间歇性的最早阶段就会变差。