Surgical Results in Cases of Sensory Strabismus

Purpose: To determine horizontal deviation type and to evaluate the correlation between deviation type/etiology and\udsurgical results for sensory strabismus.\udPatients and Methods: The reports of 29 patients operated for sensory strabismus (12 female, 17 male) whose mean\udage was 22.17±11.52 (range: 4-57) years were evaluated retrospectively. Sixteen cases (55.2%) had exotropia (XT) and\ud13 cases (44.8%) had esotropia (ET). Etiologies, ages during surgeries, and preoperative/postoperative deviation\udamounts were noted for the total of the patients as well as for ET and XT groups separately. The results for ET and XT\udgroups were compared statistically using t test. The mean follow-up time was 4.27±3.5 years (range: 4 months-12\udyears) and deviation in ±10 prism diopters (PD) in the last visit was considered as success.\udResults: Etiologies in all cases examined were as follows: anisometropia in 13 (44.8%), trauma in 10 (34.5%), congenital\udcataracts in 2, and congenital glaucoma, keratoconus, choroidal coloboma, and hypoplastic optic disc in one case\udeach. The visual acuity of the squinting eyes ranged from no light perception to 0.8 logMAR. The mean preoperative\uddeviation was 46.24±19.29 PD, and the mean postoperative deviation decreased to 9.55±11.86 PD in the last visit.\udWhen the ET and XT groups were compared, the congenital causes were more common in the ET group (30.75%) compared\udto the XT group (6.25%), otherwise, there was no statistically significant difference in terms of mean age, preoperative\udand postoperative deviation amounts and follow-up time between the two groups (p>0.05). In contrast, while\udthe surgical success rate was found to be 75.9 % for all cases and 87.5% for the XT group, it was 61.5% for the ET group.\udDiscussion: Despite the deep amblyopia in sensory strabismus, satisfactory surgical results are achieved; nevertheless, the\udsuccess may be more limited in sensory esotropia particularly due to congenital causes. (Turk J Ophthalmol 2011; 41: 217-20