Corneal topography changes in cases with duane retraction syndrome in different gaze positions

0Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the corneal topographic changes in patients with Duane retraction syndrome in different gaze positions and to investigate the effect of eyelids on corneal topography. Material and Methods: Thirty-three cases with Duane retraction syndrome and 19 control patients were included in the study. Corneal topographies of the cases with Duane retraction syndrome were first measured during their preferred gaze and then during primary gaze position. Topographies of the cases in control group were measured in their right eye during primary gaze position and when the eye was on adduction. Results: Mean horizontal sim K value of the cases with Duane retraction syndrome with preferred gaze position was 41.4 ± 2.3 D, while vertical sim K value was 42.7 ± 1.9 D, and with their primary gaze position, mean horizontal sim K value was 40.5 ± 1.8 D, and vertical sim K value was 42.7 ± 1.8 D. Statistically significant horizontal flattening was noted in primary gaze position (p= 0.009). No statistically significant difference was found between the measurements of horizontal and vertical sim K values of control patients in different gaze positions. Conclusion: Duane retraction syndrome is a rare congenital ocular motility disorder. Although the pathogenesis is not clear, abnormal innervation of the extraocular muscles is mostly blamed. Most of the patients with Duane retraction syndrome develope a face turn position to achieve binocular vision. In our study, we concluded that eyelid position and the changes in corneal topography might affect the development of face turn position. © 2011 by Türkiye Klinikleri.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Yeniad, B., & Gezer, A. (2011). Corneal topography changes in cases with duane retraction syndrome in different gaze positions. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Medical Sciences, 31(3), 641–645. https://doi.org/10.5336/medsci.2009-14148

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free