Y Morad1, S P Kraft, J L Mims. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, The Hospital for Sick Children and The University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy of lateral rectus resection with medial rectus recession in the affected eye of patients with Duane retraction syndrome (DRS) with esotropia and limited abduction, compared with bilateral medial rectus recessions. METHODS: The charts of 9 patients with DRS who underwent a recession-resection procedure and 10 patients with DRS who underwent bilateral medial rectus recessions were reviewed. Ocular ductions (graded from 0 = full duction to -4 = total deficit), severity of retraction, alignment, head position, and binocular single vision field (for study group only) were recorded before and after surgery. RESULTS: Before surgery, the study and control groups did not differ in mean primary position esotropia (16.9 and 18.8 PD, respectively), face turn (16.5 degrees and 15.0 degrees, respectively), average limitation of abduction (-3.9 and -3.7, respectively), or adduction (-0.1 and -0.3, respectively). After surgery, both groups had similar mean face turns (3.9 degrees and 1.0 degrees ), esotropia (3.3 PD and 1.0 PD), and abduction limitation in the affected eye (-2.4 and -2.6). However, mean adduction was significantly worse in the control group than in the study group (-1.5 vs -0.6, P = .02). Globe retraction improved in all control subjects. It worsened in 5 study subjects and did not improve in the other 4. In the study group, 1 patient required reoperation for undercorrection and another was overcorrected. CONCLUSION: Seven of 9 patients with DRS, selected on the basis of esotropia, limited abduction, and mild retraction, benefited from a recession-resection procedure. Abduction improved to the same degree as seen after bilateral medial rectus recessions, with less tendency to limit adduction.
PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy of lateral rectus resection with medial rectus recession in the affected eye of patients with Duane retraction syndrome (DRS) with esotropia and limited abduction, compared with bilateral medial rectus recessions. METHODS: The charts of 9 patients with DRS who underwent a recession-resection procedure and 10 patients with DRS who underwent bilateral medial rectus recessions were reviewed. Ocular ductions (graded from 0 = full duction to -4 = total deficit), severity of retraction, alignment, head position, and binocular single vision field (for study group only) were recorded before and after surgery. RESULTS: Before surgery, the study and control groups did not differ in mean primary position esotropia (16.9 and 18.8 PD, respectively), face turn (16.5 degrees and 15.0 degrees, respectively), average limitation of abduction (-3.9 and -3.7, respectively), or adduction (-0.1 and -0.3, respectively). After surgery, both groups had similar mean face turns (3.9 degrees and 1.0 degrees ), esotropia (3.3 PD and 1.0 PD), and abduction limitation in the affected eye (-2.4 and -2.6). However, mean adduction was significantly worse in the control group than in the study group (-1.5 vs -0.6, P = .02). Globe retraction improved in all control subjects. It worsened in 5 study subjects and did not improve in the other 4. In the study group, 1 patient required reoperation for undercorrection and another was overcorrected. CONCLUSION: Seven of 9 patients with DRS, selected on the basis of esotropia, limited abduction, and mild retraction, benefited from a recession-resection procedure. Abduction improved to the same degree as seen after bilateral medial rectus recessions, with less tendency to limit adduction.