Análise do duplo retrocesso de retos mediais em pacientes esotrópicos portadores de incomitância longe/perto

Introduction: Accommodative convergence (AC) is the convergence induced by a determined amount of accommodation (A). Besides the many techniques described to correct esotropias, great distance/near incomitance is still a challenge in avoiding secondary exotropias and esotropias. Objective: To compar...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autores: Barcellos, Ronaldo Boaventura, Andrade, Eric Pinheiro De, Carvalho, Luiz Eduardo M. Rebouças De [UNIFESP], Souza-dias, Carlos Ramos [UNIFESP]
Formato: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2001
País:Brasil
Recursos:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
Repositorio:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
Idioma:portugués
OAI Identifier:oai:repositorio.unifesp.br:11600/1163
Acesso em linha:http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0004-27492001000300007
http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/1163
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palavra-chave:Esotropia
Oculomotor muscles
Músculos oculomotores
Descrição
Resumo:Introduction: Accommodative convergence (AC) is the convergence induced by a determined amount of accommodation (A). Besides the many techniques described to correct esotropias, great distance/near incomitance is still a challenge in avoiding secondary exotropias and esotropias. Objective: To compare the surgical results obtained with double medial rectus recession and its relationship to distance/near incomitance and high hyperopias. Methods: 33 patients with esotropia and distance/near incomitance who where submitted to double medial rectus recession at Santa Casa de São Paulo, between 1980 and 1990 were retrospectively analyzed. There were two groups: those with more than 3.50 D of hyperopias (Group I) and those with less than 3.50 D (Group II). Results: Group I had a mean of 18.18 PD correction (72.72% of correction) for distance and 27.64 PD (63.36%) for near. Group II had a mean of 20.20 PD correction for distance (87.83%) and 34.60 PD (82.78%) for near. Conclusion: There was no statistical difference regarding the amount of distance/near incomitance reduction, between Groups I and II. The total amount of correction was greater for near but, in percentage, it was similar.