J Korean Ophthalmol Soc.  2013 Feb;54(2):317-323. 10.3341/jkos.2013.54.2.317.

Comparison of Clinical Features in Refractive Accommodative Esotropia According to the Presence of Anisometropia

• Song NH
• Kim DH

• KMID: 2216669
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2013.54.2.317

Abstract

PURPOSE
To compare the clinical features according to the presence of anisometropia in refractive accommodative esotropia patients.
METHODS
Forty-five refractive accommodative esotropia patients were divided into 2 groups : patients who had anisometropia of more than 1.00D (anisometropia group), and patients who had anisometropia of less than 1.00D (isometropia group). Age at onset, age when glasses were first worn, the initial and final angle of esotropia with or without hyperopic correction, the recovery time to orthophoria after hyperopic correction, the degree of stereoacuity and the frequency of amblyopia, the prevalence of deterioration, and the ratio of accommodative-convergence to accommodation were retrospectively reviewed.
RESULTS
There were no statistical differences between the 2 groups in the frequency of amblyopia, the prevalence of deterioration, and the ratio of accommodative-convergence to accommodation at the initial and final visit. The angles of deviation with hyperopic correction at the 1-month follow-up visit in the anisometropia group and the isometropia group were 8.80 +/- 5.63 PD for near, 8.67 +/- 5.42 PD for distance, and 4.54 +/- 6.59 PD for near 5.19 +/- 6.7 PD for distance, respectively; the difference was statistically significant (p = 0.042). The recovery time to orthophoria after hyperopic correction in patients associated with anisometropia was 2.20 +/- 1.01 months, significantly longer than 1.47 +/- 0.86 months in patients associated with isometropia (p = 0.017).
CONCLUSIONS
In refractive accommodative esotropia patients associated with anisometropia, the recovery time to orthophoria after hyperopic correction was significantly prolonged but there were no statistical differences in other clinical manifestations.

Keyword

Anisometropia; Isometropia; Refractive accommodative esotropia

MeSH Terms

Amblyopia
Anisometropia
Esotropia
Eyeglasses
Follow-Up Studies
Glass
Humans
Prevalence
Retrospective Studies

Reference

References

1. Preslan MW, Beauchamp GR. Accommodative esotropia: review of current practices and controversies. Ophthalmic Surg. 1987; 18:68–72.

2. Wilson ME, Bluestein EC, Parks MM. Binocularity in accommodative esotropia. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 1993; 30:233–6.

3. Hardman Lea SJ, Loades J, Rubinstein MP. The sensitive period for anisometropic amblyopia. Eye. 1989; 3(Pt 6):783–90.

4. Brooks SE, Johnson D, Fischer N. Anisometropia and binocularity. Ophthalmology. 1996; 103:1139–43.

5. Abrahamsson M, Sjöstrand J. Natural history of infantile anisometropia. Br J Ophthalmol. 1996; 80:860–3.

6. Bae SH, Yi K, Kim HY, Choi DG. Effects of induced anisometropia by refractive surgery on binocular vision. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2008; 49:2027–31.

7. Weakley DR. The association between anisometropia, amblyopia, and binocularity in the absence of strabismus. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 1999; 97:987–1021.

8. de Vries J.Anisometropia in children: analysis of a hospital population. Br J Ophthalmol. 1985; 69:504–7.

9. Berk AT, Koçak N, Ellidokuz H. Treatment outcomes in refractive accommodative esotropia. J AAPOS. 2004; 8:384–8.

10. Kang IS, Park SW, Park YG. Clinical features of refractive accommodative esotropia: long-term study. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2008; 49:487–92.

11. Sohn HJ, Paik HJ. Clinical features of refractive accommodative esotropia according to the age of onset. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2006; 47:941–6.

12. Lee CE, Lee YC, Lee SY. The factors influencing the visual acuity and streoacuity outcome in refractive accommodative esotropia. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2010; 51:1380–4.

13. Weakley DR Jr, Birch E.The role of anisometropia in the development of accommodative esotropia. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2000; 98:71–6.

14. Birch EE, Fawcett SL, Morale SE, et al. Risk factors for accommodative esotropia among hypermetropic children. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005; 46:526–9.

15. Von Noorden GK. Binocular vision & ocular motility. 6th ed. St. Louis: Mosby;2002. 313.

16. Kim C, Hwang JM. The clinical course of esotropia associated with hypermetropia after initial wearing of glasses. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2003; 44:134–43.

17. Raab EL. Hypermetropia in accommodative esodeviation. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 1984; 21:P64–8.

18. Yang H, Chang YH, Lee JB. Clinical features of refractive accommodative esotropia and partially accommodative esotropia. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2004; 45:626–30.

19. Mulvihill A, MacCann A, Flitcroft I, O'keefe M. Outcome in refractive accommodative esotropia. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000; 84:746–9.

20. Swan KC. Accommodative esotropia long range follow-up. Ophthalmology. 1983; 90:1141–5.

21. Tomaç S, Birdal E. Effects of anisometropia on binocularity. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2001; 38:27–33.

22. Books SE, Johnson D, Fischer N. Anisometropia and binocularity. Ophthalmology. 1996; 103:1139–43.

23. Fawcett S, Leffler J, Birch EE. Factors influencing stereoacuity in accommodative esotropia. J AAPOS. 2000; 4:15–20.

24. Kim MM, Cho YJ. The factors influencing on binocularity in accommodative esotropia. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 1997; 38:1847–51.

25. Choi MY, Chang BL. Binocularity in refractive accommodative esotropia. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 1999; 40:1663–70.

26. Dickey CF, Scott WE. The deterioration of accommodative esotropia: frequency, characteristics, and predictive factors. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 1988; 25:172–5.

27. Raab EL. Follow-up monitoring of accommodative esotropia. J AAPOS. 2001; 5:246–9.