ABSTRACT
Aims: To evaluate the utility of margin‑reflex distance (MRD) as an alternative to levator function (LF) in choosing the appropriate surgical procedure for congenital blepharoptosis. Settings and Design: This was a retrospective, observational study. Subjects and Methods: Records of patients with simple (dystrophic) congenital ptosis who were operated and followed for ≥6 months postoperatively and whose outcomes were deemed as successful were evaluated in the study. Success was defined as a MRD at the last postoperative visit of ≥3 mm. In all cases, levator resection was performed when LF was >4 mm and frontalis suspension when LF was ≤4 mm. Statistical Analysis Used: For statistical evaluations, LF was accepted as the gold standard parameter for deciding on the surgical intervention, and the optimum cutoff point for initial MRD was determined as the point at which sensitivity and specificity was highest at the receiving operating curve for the selection of surgical procedure. Results: Of one hundred and three eyes of ninety patients (44 female/46 male), levator resection was used in 44.7% and frontalis suspension in 55.3%. When the optimum cutoff point for MRD was determined as 0.5 mm, the sensitivity was 71%, specificity was 86%, and the area under the curve that represented the discriminative power of this parameter was found to be 0.826. Conclusion: The MRD at the cutoff point of 0.5 mm may be used as an alternative to LF to determine the type of surgical intervention in patients with congenital blepharoptosis whose LF cannot be reliably obtained in clinical evaluations.
ABSTRACT
Aims: The aim of this study was to compare the visual field test results in healthy children obtained via the Humphrey matrix 24‑2 threshold program and standard automated perimetry (SAP) using the Swedish interactive threshold algorithm (SITA)‑Standard 24‑2 test. Materials and Methods: This prospective study included 55 healthy children without ocular or systemic disorders who underwent both SAP and frequency doubling technology (FDT) perimetry visual field testing. Visual field test reliability indices, test duration, global indices (mean deviation [MD], and pattern standard deviation [PSD]) were compared between the 2 tests using the Wilcoxon signed‑rank test and paired t‑test. The performance of the Humphrey field analyzer (HFA) 24‑2 SITA‑standard and frequency‑doubling technology Matrix 24‑2 tests between genders were compared with Mann‑Whitney U‑test. Results: Fifty‑five healthy children with a mean age of 12.2 ± 1.9 years (range from 8 years to 16 years) were included in this prospective study. The test durations of SAP and FDT were similar (5.2 ± 0.5 and 5.1 ± 0.2 min, respectively, P = 0.651). MD and the PSD values obtained via FDT Matrix were significantly higher than those obtained via SAP (P < 0.001), and fixation losses and false negative errors were significantly less with SAP (P < 0.05). A weak positive correlation between the two tests in terms of MD (r = 0.352, P = 0.008) and PSD (r = 0.329, P = 0.014) was observed. Conclusion: Children were able to complete both the visual test algorithms successfully within 6 min. However, SAP testing appears to be associated with less depression of the visual field indices of healthy children. FDT Matrix and SAP should not be used interchangeably in the follow‑up of children.