Outcome of surgery in long-standing infantile esotropia with cross fixation

Strabismus Surgery for Psychosocial Reasons-A Literature Review

Introduction

Strabismus surgery may be undertaken for visual benefit, to improve or eliminate diplopia symptoms, or to restore or improve binocular single vision (BSV). In patients without visual symptoms or expected visual benefit, strabismus surgery may still be undertaken if the presence of strabismus causes the patient psychosocial symptoms. To evaluate strabismus surgery undertaken for psychosocial reasons, evidence of postoperative outcomes in this specific cohort is needed.

Methods

A systematic search of the literature was conducted (1946-2023) to identify evidence where postoperative outcomes were reported for adult patients (age 18 years and above) who had undergone strabismus surgery for psychosocial reasons.

Results

Sixty-nine papers were included in the literature review. Most sources of evidence included patients within heterogeneous cohorts of strabismus surgery outcomes, with a range of symptoms and differing surgical aims.

Discussion

In adults who underwent strabismus surgery for psychosocial reasons, improved postoperative ocular alignment and/or improved health related quality of life (HRQoL) were common. Strabismus surgery outcomes appeared to be measured satisfactorily at three months postoperatively. Additional surgical outcomes, including an expanded field of vision, unexpected BSV, improved binocular summation, improved task performance and improved eye movements have been reported, but not fully investigated. There was a lack of consensus on how postoperative success should be defined and measured. A core outcome set for strabismus has been suggested and there is potential to add to the available evidence by investigating which outcome measures are most relevant to those with strabismus and psychosocial symptoms. There is a growing need for robust evidence in this specific subgroup of patients due to a lack of evidence specifically reporting postoperative outcomes in adults with strabismus and psychosocial symptoms.

Validity of the Worth 4 Dot Test in Patients with Red-Green Color Vision Defect

PURPOSE

The Worth four dot test uses red and green glasses for binocular dissociation, and although it has been believed that patients with red-green color vision defects cannot accurately perform the Worth four dot test, this has not been validated. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to demonstrate the validity of the Worth four dot test in patients with congenital red-green color vision defects who have normal or abnormal binocular vision.

METHODS

A retrospective review of medical records was performed on 30 consecutive congenital red-green color vision defect patients who underwent the Worth four dot test. The type of color vision anomaly was determined by the Hardy Rand and Rittler (HRR) pseudoisochromatic plate test, Ishihara color test, anomaloscope, and/or the 100 hue test. All patients underwent a complete ophthalmologic examination. Binocular sensory status was evaluated with the Worth four dot test and Randot stereotest. The results were interpreted according to the presence of strabismus or amblyopia.

RESULTS

Among the 30 patients, 24 had normal visual acuity without strabismus nor amblyopia and 6 patients had strabismus and/or amblyopia. The 24 patients without strabismus nor amblyopia all showed binocular fusional responses by seeing four dots of the Worth four dot test. Meanwhile, the six patients with strabismus or amblyopia showed various results of fusion, suppression, and diplopia.

CONCLUSIONS

Congenital red-green color vision defect patients of different types and variable degree of binocularity could successfully perform the Worth four dot test. They showed reliable results that were in accordance with their estimated binocular sensory status.