Postoperative convergence after recovery from general anesthesia in exotropia surgery

Interventions for intermittent exotropia

BACKGROUND

The clinical management of intermittent exotropia (X(T)) has been discussed extensively in the literature, yet there remains a lack of clarity regarding indications for intervention, the most effective form of treatment, and whether there is an optimal time in the evolution of the disease at which any given treatment should be carried out.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to analyze the effects of various surgical and non-surgical treatments in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of participants with intermittent exotropia, and to report intervention criteria and determine whether the treatment effect varies by age and subtype of X(T).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2021, Issue 1), which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database (LILACS); the ISRCTN registry; ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO ICTRP. The date of the search was 20 January 2021. We performed manual searches of the British Orthoptic Journal up to 2002, and the proceedings of the European Strabismological Association (ESA), International Strabismological Association (ISA), and American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus meeting (AAPOS) up to 2001.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs of any surgical or non-surgical treatment for intermittent exotropia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six RCTs, four of which took place in the United States, and the remaining two in Asia (Turkey, India). A total of 890 participants with basic or distance X(T) were included, most of whom were children aged 12 months to 10 years. Three of these six studies were from the 2013 version of this review. Overall, the included studies had a high risk of performance bias as masking of participants and personnel administering treatment was not possible. Two RCTs compared bilateral lateral rectus recession versus unilateral lateral rectus recession with medial rectus resection, but only one RCT (n = 197) reported on the primary outcomes of this review. Bilateral lateral rectus recession likely results in little difference in motor alignment at near (MD 1.00, 95% CI -2.69 to 4.69) and distance (MD 2.00, 95% CI -1.22 to 5.22) fixation as measured in pupillary distance using PACT (moderate-certainty evidence). Bilateral lateral rectus recession may result in little to no difference in stereoacuity at near fixation (risk ratio (RR) 0.77, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.71), adverse events (RR 7.36, 95% CI 0.39 to 140.65), or quality of life measures (low-certainty evidence). We conducted a meta-analysis of two RCTs comparing patching (n = 249) with active observation (n = 252), but were unable to conduct further meta-analyses due to the clinical and methodological heterogeneity in the remaining trials. We found evidence that patching was clinically more effective than active observation in improving motor alignment at near (mean difference (MD) -2.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.02 to -0.44) and distance (MD -2.00, 95% CI -3.40 to -0.61) fixation as measured by prism and alternate cover test (PACT) at six months (high-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that patching results in little to no difference in stereoacuity at near fixation (MD 0.00, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.07) (low-certainty evidence). Stereoacuity at distance, motor fusion test, and quality of life measures were not reported. Adverse events were also not reported, but study authors explained that they were not anticipated due to the non-surgical nature of patching. One RCT (n = 38) compared prism adaptation test with eye muscle surgery versus eye muscle surgery alone. No review outcomes were reported. One RCT (n = 60) compared lateral rectus recession and medial rectus plication versus lateral rectus recession and medial rectus resection. Lateral rectus recession and medial rectus plication may not improve motor alignment at distance (MD 0.66, 95% CI -1.06 to 2.38) (low-certainty evidence). The evidence for the effect of lateral rectus recession and medial rectus plication on motor fusion test performance is very uncertain (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.74) (very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Patching confers a clinical benefit in children aged 12 months to 10 years of age with basic- or distance-type X(T) compared with active observation. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether interventions such as bilateral lateral rectus recession versus unilateral lateral rectus recession with medial rectus resection; lateral rectus recession and medial rectus plication versus lateral rectus recession and medial rectus resection; and prism adaptation test prior to eye muscle surgery versus eye muscle surgery alone may confer any benefit.

Esotropia Surgery Considering the Angle under General Anesthesia

PURPOSE

To compare the amount of esotropia corrected by surgery under general anesthesia and in a conscious state in esotropia surgery.

METHODS

The charts of 42 patients who underwent surgery under general anesthesia for correction of esotropia were reviewed. Angle of deviation was measured by the alternate prism cover test in awakened state one day before and after surgery. Under general anesthesia, angle of deviation was measured by Hirschberg or Krimsky test in 5 prism diopters (PD) scale 30 minutes after induction and at the end of the surgery. The amount of the angle of esodeviation corrected by surgery measured in awakened state (A-correction) and under general anesthesia (G-correction) was compared and analyzed to identify significant differences.

RESULTS

The median age was 4.0 years and the median preoperative esodeviation angle was 30.0 PD. The median amount of G-correction of 30.0 PD was significantly different compared with that of A-correction at postoperative day one (p=0.003). However, differences between A-correction and G-correction were not evident at postoperative one week, one month, and final follow-up examination (p= 0.191, 0.215, and 0.396, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Esotropia in A-correction was comparable to that in G-correction only at postoperative day one. These results suggest that it is desirable to perform esotropia surgery according to the initial surgical plan of awakened state regardless of the divergence of eye position. When in doubt, it could be useful to confirm whether the actual amount of surgical correction under general anesthesia is consistent with the plan and modifying the surgical dose nomogram.

An external pilot study to test the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial comparing eye muscle surgery against active monitoring for childhood intermittent exotropia [X(T)]

INTRODUCTION

The evidence base for the treatment of strabismus (squint) is poor. Our main aim is to improve this evidence base for the treatment of a common type of childhood squint {intermittent exotropia, [X(T)]}. We conducted an external pilot study in order to inform the design and conduct of a future full randomised controlled trial (RCT).

METHODS

Children of between 6 months and 16 years with a recent diagnosis of X(T) were eligible for recruitment. Participants were recruited from secondary care at the ophthalmology departments at four UK NHS foundation trusts. Participants were randomised to either active monitoring or surgery. This report describes the findings of the Pilot Rehearsal Trial and Qualitative Study, and assesses the success against the objectives proposed.

RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION

The experience gained during the Pilot Rehearsal Trial demonstrates the ability to recruit and retain sites that are willing to randomise children to both trial arms, and for parents to agree to randomisation of their children to such a study. One child declined the group allocation. A total of 231 children were screened (expected 240), of whom 138 (60%) were eligible (expected 228: 95%) and 49 (35% of eligible) children were recruited (expected 144: 63% of eligible). Strategies that improved recruitment over the course of the trial are discussed, together with the reasons why fewer children were eligible for recruitment than initially anticipated. Attrition was low. Outcome data were obtained for 47 of 49 randomised children.

TRIAL PROCESSES AND DATA COLLECTION

The Trial Management processes proved effective. There were high levels of completion on all of the data collection forms. However, the feedback from the treatment orthoptists revealed that some modifications should be made to the length and frequency of the health service assessment and travel assessment questionnaires, thus reducing the burden on participants in the main trial. Modifications to the wording of the questions also need to be made.

MONITORING OF BIAS

Children who recruited to the trial were older and had more severe strabismus than those children eligible but declining participation. Strategies to account for this in a full trial are proposed.

REASONS FOR PARTICIPATION OR DECLINING STUDY

These were identified using qualitative interviews. The principal reasons for declining entry into the study were strong preferences for and against surgical treatment.

HARMS

There were no serious unexpected adverse events. Two children had overcorrection of their X(T) with reduction in binocular vision following surgery, which is in line with previous studies. No children in the active monitoring arm developed a constant strabismus although two showed some reduction in control.

CONCLUSIONS

The SamExo study has demonstrated that it is possible to recruit and retain participants to a randomised trial of surgery compared with active monitoring for X(T). For longer-term full RCTs, in order to maximise the generalisability of future studies, consideration needs to be given to planning more time and clinic appointments to assess eligibility and to allow consideration of participation; the greater use of research nurses for recruitment; and accommodating the strong preferences of some parents both for and against surgical intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN44114892.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 39. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.