-
Academic Emergency Medicine : Official... May 2023History and physical examination are key features to narrow the differential diagnosis of central versus peripheral causes in patients presenting with acute vertigo. We... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
History and physical examination are key features to narrow the differential diagnosis of central versus peripheral causes in patients presenting with acute vertigo. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic test accuracy of physical examination findings.
METHODS
This study involved a patient-intervention-control-outcome (PICO) question: (P) adult ED patients with vertigo/dizziness; (I) presence/absence of specific physical examination findings; and (O) central (ischemic stroke, hemorrhage, others) versus peripheral etiology. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) was assessed.
RESULTS
From 6309 titles, 460 articles were retrieved, and 43 met the inclusion criteria: general neurologic examination-five studies, 869 patients, pooled sensitivity 46.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 32.3%-61.9%, moderate certainty) and specificity 92.8% (95% CI 75.7%-98.1%, low certainty); limb weakness/hemiparesis-four studies, 893 patients, sensitivity 11.4% (95% CI 5.1%-23.6%, high) and specificity 98.5% (95% CI 97.1%-99.2%, high); truncal/gait ataxia-10 studies, 1810 patients (increasing severity of truncal ataxia had an increasing sensitivity for central etiology, sensitivity 69.7% [43.3%-87.9%, low] and specificity 83.7% [95% CI 52.1%-96.0%, low]); dysmetria signs-four studies, 1135 patients, sensitivity 24.6% (95% CI 15.6%-36.5%, high) and specificity 97.8% (94.4%-99.2%, high); head impulse test (HIT)-17 studies, 1366 patients, sensitivity 76.8% (64.4%-85.8%, low) and specificity 89.1% (95% CI 75.8%-95.6%, moderate); spontaneous nystagmus-six studies, 621 patients, sensitivity 52.3% (29.8%-74.0%, moderate) and specificity 42.0% (95% CI 15.5%-74.1%, moderate); nystagmus type-16 studies, 1366 patients (bidirectional, vertical, direction changing, or pure torsional nystagmus are consistent with a central cause of vertigo, sensitivity 50.7% [95% CI 41.1%-60.2%, moderate] and specificity 98.5% [95% CI 91.7%-99.7%, moderate]); test of skew-15 studies, 1150 patients (skew deviation is abnormal and consistent with central etiology, sensitivity was 23.7% [95% CI 15%-35.4%, moderate] and specificity 97.6% [95% CI 96%-98.6%, moderate]); HINTS (head impulse, nystagmus, test of skew)-14 studies, 1781 patients, sensitivity 92.9% (95% CI 79.1%-97.9%, high) and specificity 83.4% (95% CI 69.6%-91.7%, moderate); and HINTS+ (HINTS with hearing component)-five studies, 342 patients, sensitivity 99.0% (95% CI 73.6%-100%, high) and specificity 84.8% (95% CI 70.1%-93.0%, high).
CONCLUSIONS
Most neurologic examination findings have low sensitivity and high specificity for a central cause in patients with acute vertigo or dizziness. In acute vestibular syndrome (monophasic, continuous, persistent dizziness), HINTS and HINTS+ have high sensitivity when performed by trained clinicians.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Dizziness; Stroke; Vertigo; Emergency Service, Hospital; Nystagmus, Pathologic; Physical Examination
PubMed: 36453134
DOI: 10.1111/acem.14630 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2021The clinical management of intermittent exotropia (X(T)) has been discussed extensively in the literature, yet there remains a lack of clarity regarding indications for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
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.
Topics: Asia; Child; Exotropia; Humans; Oculomotor Muscles; Strabismus; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 34516656
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003737.pub4 -
Musculoskeletal Surgery Dec 2022The primary aim of this systematic review is to evaluate how postural balance and visual system are related in cross-eyed patients. The secondary goal is to assess the... (Review)
Review
The primary aim of this systematic review is to evaluate how postural balance and visual system are related in cross-eyed patients. The secondary goal is to assess the benefits of eye realignment on motor skills and body balance. Analyzing two different approaches: surgical or conservative, a systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed-Medline, Google Scholar and Cochrane Central in order to identify randomized controlled trials, case series and case-control studies which contained clinical evaluation of balance in strabismic patients as well as re-evaluation after surgery or conservative treatments via posturography to evaluate surface, length and mean speed of the center of pressure (CoP). A total of 11 studies were included in this review. The MINORS score is used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies, and its mean value was 12.8 for non-comparative studies and 17.5 for comparative studies. The postural balance was lower in strabismic patients compared with the control group, with statically higher value (p < 0.05) of surface, length and mean speed of the CoP in the study group. All patients show improvement in stability after surgery, as surface, length and mean speed of the CoP decreased after surgery in all the studies with statistical significance (p < 0.05).
Topics: Humans; Strabismus; Postural Balance; Physical Therapy Modalities; Case-Control Studies
PubMed: 35187611
DOI: 10.1007/s12306-022-00737-y -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2020Convergence insufficiency is a common binocular vision disorder in which the eyes have a strong tendency to drift outward (exophoria) with difficulty turning the eyes... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Convergence insufficiency is a common binocular vision disorder in which the eyes have a strong tendency to drift outward (exophoria) with difficulty turning the eyes inward when reading or doing close work.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the comparative effectiveness and relative ranking of non-surgical interventions for convergence insufficiency through a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed and three trials registers up to 20 September 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining any form of non-surgical intervention versus placebo, no treatment, sham treatment, or other non-surgical interventions. Participants were children and adults with symptomatic convergence insufficiency.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed standard Cochrane methodology. We performed NMAs separately for children and adults.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 trials (six in children and six in adults) with a total of 1289 participants. Trials evaluated seven interventions: 1) office-based vergence/accommodative therapy with home reinforcement; 2) home-based pencil/target push-ups; 3) home-based computer vergence/accommodative therapy; 4) office-based vergence/accommodative therapy alone; 5) placebo vergence/accommodative therapy or other placebo intervention; 6) prism reading glasses; and 7) placebo reading glasses. Six RCTs in the pediatric population randomized 968 participants. Of these, the Convergence Insufficiency Treatment Trial (CITT) Investigator Group completed four RCTs with 737 participants. All four CITT RCTs were rated at low risk of bias. Diagnostic criteria and outcome measures were identical or similar among these trials. The four CITT RCTs contributed data to the pediatric NMA, incorporating interventions 1, 2, 3 and 5. When treatment success was defined by a composite outcome requiring both clinical measures of convergence to be normal, and also show a pre-specified magnitude of improvement, we found high-certainty evidence that office-based vergence/accommodative therapy with home reinforcement increases the chance of a successful outcome, compared with home-based computer vergence/accommodative therapy (risk ratio (RR) 1.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32 to 2.94), home-based pencil/target push-ups (RR 2.86, 95% CI 1.82 to 4.35); and placebo (RR 3.04, 95% CI 2.32 to 3.98). However, there may be no evidence of any treatment difference between home-based computer vergence/accommodative therapy and home-based pencil/target push-ups (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.24; low-certainty evidence), or between either of the two home-based therapies and placebo therapy, for the outcome of treatment success. When treatment success was defined as the composite convergence and symptom success outcome, we found moderate-certainty evidence that participants who received office-based vergence/accommodative therapy with home reinforcement were 5.12 (95% CI 2.01 to 13.07) times more likely to achieve treatment success than those who received placebo therapy. We found low-certainty evidence that participants who received office-based vergence/accommodative therapy with home reinforcement might be 4.41 (95% CI 1.26 to 15.38) times more likely to achieve treatment success than those who received home-based pencil push-ups, and 4.65 (95% CI 1.23 to 17.54) times more likely than those who received home-based computer vergence/accommodative therapy. There was no evidence of any treatment difference between home-based pencil push-ups and home-based computer vergence/accommodative therapy, or between either of the two home-based therapies and placebo therapy. One RCT evaluated the effectiveness of base-in prism reading glasses in children. When base-in prism reading glasses were compared with placebo reading glasses, investigators found no evidence of a difference in the three outcome measures of near point convergence (NPC), positive fusional vergence (PFV), or symptom scores measured by the Convergence Insufficiency Symptom Survey (CISS). Six RCTs in the adult population randomized 321 participants. We rated only one RCT at low risk of bias. Because not all studies of adults included composite success data, we could not conduct NMAs for treatment success. We thus were limited to comparing the mean difference (MD) between interventions for improving NPC, PFV, and CISS scores individually using data from three RCTs (107 participants; interventions 1, 2, 4 and 5). Compared with placebo treatment, office-based vergence accommodative therapy was relatively more effective in improving PFV (MD 16.73, 95% CI 6.96 to 26.60), but there was no evidence of a difference for NPC or the CISS score. There was no evidence of difference for any other comparisons for any outcomes. One trial evaluated base-in prism glasses prescribed for near-work activities and found that the prism glasses group had fewer symptoms compared with the placebo glasses group at three months (MD -8.9, 95% CI -11.6 to -6.3). The trial found no evidence of a difference with this intervention in NPC or PFV. No adverse effects related to study treatments were reported for any of the included studies. Excellent adherence was reported for office-based vergence/accommodative therapy (96.6% or higher) in two trials. Reported adherence with home-based therapy was less consistent, with one study reporting decreasing adherence over time (weeks 7 to 12) and lower completion rates with home-based pencil/target push-ups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Current research suggests that office-based vergence/accommodative therapy with home reinforcement is more effective than home-based pencil/target push-ups or home-based computer vergence/accommodative therapy for children. In adults, evidence of the effectiveness of various non-surgical interventions is less clear.
Topics: Adult; Bias; Child; Exotropia; Eyeglasses; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Ocular Motility Disorders; Orthoptics; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33263359
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006768.pub3 -
Scientific Reports Oct 2016This systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the risk of development of concomitant strabismus due to refractive errors. Eligible studies published from 1946... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the risk of development of concomitant strabismus due to refractive errors. Eligible studies published from 1946 to April 1, 2016 were identified from MEDLINE and EMBASE that evaluated any kinds of refractive errors (myopia, hyperopia, astigmatism and anisometropia) as an independent factor for concomitant exotropia and concomitant esotropia. Totally 5065 published records were retrieved for screening, 157 of them eligible for detailed evaluation. Finally 7 population-based studies involving 23,541 study subjects met our criteria for meta-analysis. The combined OR showed that myopia was a risk factor for exotropia (OR: 5.23, P = 0.0001). We found hyperopia had a dose-related effect for esotropia (OR for a spherical equivalent [SE] of 2-3 diopters [D]: 10.16, P = 0.01; OR for an SE of 3-4D: 17.83, P < 0.0001; OR for an SE of 4-5D: 41.01, P < 0.0001; OR for an SE of ≥5D: 162.68, P < 0.0001). Sensitivity analysis indicated our results were robust. Results of this study confirmed myopia as a risk for concomitant exotropia and identified a dose-related effect for hyperopia as a risk of concomitant esotropia.
Topics: Anisometropia; Astigmatism; Child; Cross-Sectional Studies; Esotropia; Exotropia; Female; Humans; Hyperopia; Male; Myopia; Odds Ratio; Refractive Errors; Risk Factors; Strabismus
PubMed: 27731389
DOI: 10.1038/srep35177 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jun 2011Amblyopia is commonly associated with squint (strabismus) or refractive errors resulting in different visual inputs to each eye during the sensitive period of visual... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Amblyopia is commonly associated with squint (strabismus) or refractive errors resulting in different visual inputs to each eye during the sensitive period of visual development (<7-8 years of age). The cumulative incidence is estimated at 2% to 4% in children aged up to 15 years.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of interventions to detect amblyopia early? What are the effects of medical treatments for amblyopia? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to May 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations, such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 33 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: active vision therapy; glasses alone or with occlusion; or penalisation to treat amblyopia; and screening to detect amblyopia early.
Topics: Amblyopia; Eyeglasses; Humans; Refractive Errors; Sensory Deprivation; Strabismus; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 21714945
DOI: No ID Found -
Strabismus Mar 2023The objective of this review was to estimate the prevalence of strabismus and amblyopia in Africa. A systematic online literature search was conducted for articles on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The objective of this review was to estimate the prevalence of strabismus and amblyopia in Africa. A systematic online literature search was conducted for articles on strabismus and amblyopia in Africa. Meta-analysis was performed, using the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation, to estimate the prevalence of strabismus and amblyopia in Africa. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to age, gender, study year, and type of amblyopia. Meta-regression was used to evaluate the influence of predetermined factors on the prevalence of amblyopia. 8 (1 population-based & 7 school-based) and 21 (3 population-based & 18 school-based) studies on strabismus and amblyopia with sample sizes of 22,355 and 46,841, respectively, were included in the review. Overall prevalence of strabismus in Africa was estimated to be 0.8% (95% CI: 0.4% - 1.4%); exotropia was 0.2% (95% CI: 0.1% - 0.5%) and esotropia was 0.5% (95% CI: 0.1% - 1.2%). Overall prevalence of amblyopia was estimated to be 0.6% (95% CI: 0.3% - 0.9%); refractive and strabismic amblyopia were 1.1% (95% CI: 0.2% - 2.5%) and 0.4% (95% CI: 0.2% - 0.6%), respectively. Prevalence estimate of amblyopia in males was 1.8% (95% CI: 0.7% - 3.3%) and in females was 1.3% (95% CI: 0.4% - 2.6%). There was a significant association between the prevalence of amblyopia and the type of amblyopia (p = .007) and the study year (p = .006). Although there appears to be a relatively low prevalence of strabismus and amblyopia in Africa, there is a dearth of well-designed population-based studies on strabismus and amblyopia in Africa, resulting in the lack of epidemiological information on strabismus and amblyopia within the general African population. Information about the prevalence of strabismus and amblyopia across Africa can inform policy making and design and implementation of public health intervention program.
Topics: Male; Female; Humans; Amblyopia; Visual Acuity; Strabismus; Esotropia; Prevalence; Africa
PubMed: 36576233
DOI: 10.1080/09273972.2022.2157023 -
Zeitschrift Fur Naturforschung. C,... Jan 2023The COVID-19 mainly causes respiratory disorders with high infection and severe morbidity and mortality. Neurologists have concerns about potential neurological side... (Review)
Review
The COVID-19 mainly causes respiratory disorders with high infection and severe morbidity and mortality. Neurologists have concerns about potential neurological side effects, profits, and timing of COVID-19 vaccines. This study aimed to review systematically research for the COVID-19 vaccine and neurological complications. Data was searched in Scopus, ISI web of knowledge, Medline, PubMed, Wiley, Embase, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and Clinical Trials, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. Two reviewer authors individually searched and assessed the titles and abstracts of all articles. The third reviewer resolved disagreement between them. Data were documented regarding study location, study design, type of complications, number of patients, various types of COVID-19 vaccine, and type of neurological complications. Six studies in COVID-19 vaccine and neurological complications include two studies about neurological manifestations after the mRNA vaccines, four records about side effects of vector-based vaccine were included in the study. The main neurological complication associated mRNA vaccines were body aches, paresthesia, and difficulty walking, erythema migrans lesion, fatigue, myalgia, and pain in the left lateral deltoid region. The major neurological complication related to vector-based vaccines were urinary retention difficulty, feeding and ambulating, arm soreness, mild fatigue, chills, left-sided facial droop, headaches, a generalized epileptic seizure, hemianopia, and mild aphasia, acute somnolence and right-hand hemiparesis, acute transverse myelitis, deep vein thrombosis in her left leg, a vigilance disorder and a twitching, a severe immobilizing opsoclonus myoclonus syndrome, and encephalitis. A large spectrum of severe neurological unfavorable has been reported. These complications could occur as a result of molecular stimulation and later neuronal damage. Generally, the advantages of COVID-19 vaccination are dominant on the risks of a neurological complication at both individual and population levels. Future investigations will be required to find any relationship between neurological complications and COVID-19 vaccines principally as new strains of the virus and new vaccines are technologically advanced against them.
Topics: Humans; Female; COVID-19 Vaccines; COVID-19
PubMed: 36087300
DOI: 10.1515/znc-2022-0092 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Sep 2009Amblyopia is commonly associated with squint (strabismus) or refractive errors resulting in different visual inputs to each eye during the sensitive period of visual... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Amblyopia is commonly associated with squint (strabismus) or refractive errors resulting in different visual inputs to each eye during the sensitive period of visual development (<7-8 years of age). The cumulative incidence is estimated at 2% to 4% in children aged up to 15 years.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of interventions to detect amblyopia early? What are the effects of medical treatments for amblyopia? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to May 2008 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations, such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 16 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: active vision therapy; glasses alone or with occlusion; or penalisation to treat amblyopia; and screening to detect amblyopia early.
Topics: Amblyopia; Eyeglasses; Humans; Mydriatics; Sensory Deprivation; Strabismus; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 21726480
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Binocular Vision and Ocular... 2023To quantify typical disease characteristics for patients with congenital fibrosis of the extraocular muscles (CFEOM) including pre-and post-surgical ocular alignment and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To quantify typical disease characteristics for patients with congenital fibrosis of the extraocular muscles (CFEOM) including pre-and post-surgical ocular alignment and head positioning as well as average improvement with surgical intervention.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
This investigation is a systematic review and meta-analysis. All studies detailing surgical intervention in cohorts of individuals with CFEOM were included. Ocular alignment and head positioning before and after surgery was recorded. Meta-analyses were performed to quantify these findings along with other patient characteristics across all included studies.
RESULTS
The estimated average improvement in vertical alignment for patients with unilateral and bilateral CFEOM was 34.8 pd (prism diopters) and 21.27 pd, respectively. For horizontal alignment, patients with unilateral and bilateral CFEOM improved an average of 25.39 pd and 10.99 pd after surgery, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two most common surgeries used to address hypotropia and blepharoptosis in this patient population. The estimated proportion of patients with post-surgical head alignment within 5-9° was 60.64% and was 28.25% for patients with<5° of alignment.
CONCLUSION
This study was able to illuminate many characteristic features of patients with CFEOM. Surgical intervention for the ocular alignment and head positioning of these patients demonstrates promising utility.
Topics: Humans; Oculomotor Muscles; Ophthalmoplegia; Strabismus; Fibrosis
PubMed: 36780505
DOI: No ID Found