Surgically induced incomitance following unilateral versus bilateral medial rectus recessions for esotropia.

IF 0.8 Q4 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Aleksander Stupnicki, Surinder Dosanjh, Saurabh Jain
{"title":"Surgically induced incomitance following unilateral versus bilateral medial rectus recessions for esotropia.","authors":"Aleksander Stupnicki, Surinder Dosanjh, Saurabh Jain","doi":"10.1080/09273972.2025.2526728","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>For small-angle strabismus, unilateral medial rectus recession (UMR) offers many advantages over bilateral procedures (BMR), including a shorter operative time, faster recovery and fewer complications, while preserving the contralateral medial rectus muscle. However, the asymmetric nature of the procedure poses a theoretical risk of induced incomitance in the direction of action of the recessed muscle. This study aims to compare the incidence and nature of induced incomitance following unilateral and bilateral medial rectus recession in the management of non-accommodative esotropia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Through a retrospective chart review, we identified 43 patients who underwent surgical management for esotropia in the form of UMR (<i>n</i> = 21) or BMR (<i>n</i> = 22). The exclusion criteria included previous strabismus surgery and simultaneous surgery on the oblique muscles. Measurements of deviation in lateral gaze were obtained pre- and post-operatively using the prism cover test (PCT) in nine positions of gaze. Incomitance was defined as a horizontal deviation difference of > 5PD between primary and lateral gaze.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surgically induced incomitance was observed in 2 patients (9.5%) in the UMR cohort and 2 patients (9.1%) in the BMR cohort (<i>p</i> = 1.00). The mean magnitude of induced incomitance among affected patients was 9 PD in UMR vs. 8 PD in BMR. No statistically significant associations were found between the occurrence of incomitance and age, pre-operative deviation, amount of recession or follow-up duration (<i>p</i> > .05). All patients suffering from post-operative incomitance reported diplopia that resolved over time and did not need further intervention. Higher values of incomitance were associated with a more prolonged period of diplopia.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our data demonstrates comparably low rates of induced incomitance in the management of esotropia after UMR and BMR, with no significant statistical difference. Our findings support the viability of unilateral recessions for small-to-moderate esotropias.</p>","PeriodicalId":51700,"journal":{"name":"Strabismus","volume":" ","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Strabismus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09273972.2025.2526728","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: For small-angle strabismus, unilateral medial rectus recession (UMR) offers many advantages over bilateral procedures (BMR), including a shorter operative time, faster recovery and fewer complications, while preserving the contralateral medial rectus muscle. However, the asymmetric nature of the procedure poses a theoretical risk of induced incomitance in the direction of action of the recessed muscle. This study aims to compare the incidence and nature of induced incomitance following unilateral and bilateral medial rectus recession in the management of non-accommodative esotropia.

Methods: Through a retrospective chart review, we identified 43 patients who underwent surgical management for esotropia in the form of UMR (n = 21) or BMR (n = 22). The exclusion criteria included previous strabismus surgery and simultaneous surgery on the oblique muscles. Measurements of deviation in lateral gaze were obtained pre- and post-operatively using the prism cover test (PCT) in nine positions of gaze. Incomitance was defined as a horizontal deviation difference of > 5PD between primary and lateral gaze.

Results: Surgically induced incomitance was observed in 2 patients (9.5%) in the UMR cohort and 2 patients (9.1%) in the BMR cohort (p = 1.00). The mean magnitude of induced incomitance among affected patients was 9 PD in UMR vs. 8 PD in BMR. No statistically significant associations were found between the occurrence of incomitance and age, pre-operative deviation, amount of recession or follow-up duration (p > .05). All patients suffering from post-operative incomitance reported diplopia that resolved over time and did not need further intervention. Higher values of incomitance were associated with a more prolonged period of diplopia.

Conclusion: Our data demonstrates comparably low rates of induced incomitance in the management of esotropia after UMR and BMR, with no significant statistical difference. Our findings support the viability of unilateral recessions for small-to-moderate esotropias.

单侧与双侧内侧直肌衰退治疗内斜视后手术引起的不适。
背景:对于小角度斜视,单侧内侧直肌收缩术(UMR)比双侧手术(BMR)有许多优点,包括手术时间更短,恢复更快,并发症更少,同时保留对侧内侧直肌。然而,该手术的不对称性质在理论上有引起凹陷肌肉运动方向不适的风险。本研究旨在比较单侧和双侧内侧直肌收缩治疗非调节性内斜视后引起的并发症的发生率和性质。方法:通过回顾性图表回顾,我们确定了43例以UMR (n = 21)或BMR (n = 22)形式接受手术治疗的内斜视患者。排除标准包括既往斜视手术和同时斜肌手术。术前和术后使用棱镜盖测试(PCT)测量9个凝视位置的侧向凝视偏差。不共视被定义为主凝视与侧凝视之间bbb50pd的水平偏差差。结果:UMR组中有2例(9.5%)患者出现手术引起的不适,BMR组中有2例(9.1%)患者出现手术引起的不适(p = 1.00)。在受影响的患者中,UMR组诱导的平均不适程度为9pd,而BMR组为8pd。并发症的发生与年龄、术前偏差、衰退量及随访时间无统计学意义(p < 0.05)。所有术后并发症的患者都报告复视随着时间的推移而消退,不需要进一步的干预。较高的不舒适值与较长的复视期有关。结论:我们的数据显示,UMR和BMR后内斜视的诱发性并发症发生率相对较低,无显著统计学差异。我们的研究结果支持单侧衰退对小到中度内斜视的可行性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Strabismus
Strabismus OPHTHALMOLOGY-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
30
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信