| Literature DB >> 24558590 |
Panagiotis G Beis1, Catherine G Brozou1, Konstantinos I Gourgoulianis2, Chaido Pastaka2, Dimitrios Z Chatzoulis1, Evangelia E Tsironi1.
Abstract
Background. The aim of this study is to present a method of lid laxity evaluation and investigate whether there is an association between floppy eyelid syndrome (FES) and body mass index (BMI) in sleep apnea syndrome (SAS) patients compared to normal subjects. Method. A total of 135 participants (81 patients with SAS and 54 normal subjects) had a full ophthalmologic examination. The presence of FES was estimated in relation to SAS and BMI. Results. The floppy eyelid was characterized "hyperelastic," "FES stage 1 (asymptomatic)," or "FES stage 2 (symptomatic)" depending on its laxity capacity. Hyperelastic floppy eyelid in SAS patients was statistically significant (P < 0.05) when compared to normals. Similarly, the presence of hyperelasticity in high-BMI SAS patients was also statistically significant (P < 0.05) when compared to low-BMI SAS patients. Floppy eyelid syndrome was more frequent in SAS patients than in normal subjects (P < 0.05), but no association was found between FES and obesity (P > 0.05). Conclusion. A classification of FES is proposed based on lid laxity. In addition to this, our data suggests a clear association of hyperelasticity and FES to SAS patients but no association between obesity and FES.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 24558590 PMCID: PMC3914272 DOI: 10.5402/2012/650892
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ISRN Ophthalmol ISSN: 2090-5688
Demographic data of both groups regarding age, height, weight, and body mass index (BMI).
| SAS group ( | Normal group ( | |
|---|---|---|
| mean ± SD | mean ± SD | |
| Age | 49,58 ± 12,54 | 43,85 ± 12,52 |
| Height | 1,74 ± 0,069 | 1,74 ± 0,076 |
| Weight | 101 ± 19,10 | 86,44 ± 16,99 |
| BMI | 33,50 ± 6,26 | 28,56 ± 5,82 |
The number of patients of each subgroup presenting hyperelasticity is presented in this table. To make the comparison easier, the number of patients without hyperelasticity is also noted. A predomination of hyperelasticity on the SAS group is clear.
| SAS | Normals | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SAS low BMI | SAS high BMI | Normals low BMI | Normals high BMI | |
| Hyperelasticity | 8 | 33 | 5 | 11 |
| No laxity | 14 | 26 | 28 | 10 |
The number of patients having FES is presented here for all subgroups and for all stages of FES. The number of patients without laxity is also noted to facilitate comparison. It is evident from the data that the overall number of patients presenting FES in the SAS group is greater than the one in the normal group.
| SAS group | Normal group | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SAS low BMI | SAS high BMI | Normal low BMI | Normal high BMI | |
| FES stage1 | 6 | 17 | 3 | 6 |
| FES stage 2 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| No laxity | 16 | 37 | 30 | 15 |
Figure 1The distribution of FES both in SAS group and in normal group. We can see a predomination of subjects with FES in both groups.