检索历史 清除

目的：:观察分析小角度间歇性外斜视（IXT）患者的调节和聚散功能特征及其与融合状态的相关性。方法：:前瞻性队列研究。连续收集2023年1—7月就诊于山西省眼科医院的看远≤30棱镜度（PD）的小角度IXT患者37例（74眼）作为斜视组，选择同期就诊于本院眼科门诊的正常人群20例（40眼）作为对照组。检查2组纳入对象的远近斜视度数、融合功能、调节性集合与调节的比值（AC/A）、集合近点、调节幅度、调节灵敏度、调节反应、正/负相对调节及远、近融合性聚散功能。比较2组纳入对象在调节、聚散及融合功能方面的差异，并分析各调节、聚散参数与融合功能的相关性。组间数据比较采用独立样本 t检验或Wilcoxon秩和检验，调节和聚散参数与融合状态的相关性分析采用Spearman等级相关分析。 结果：:斜视组主导眼调节灵敏度和双眼调节灵敏度分别为（8.2±3.7）cpm和（7.9±3.7）cpm，均低于对照组的（10.7±1.9）cpm和（10.4±2.2）cpm（ t=-2.30， P=0.021； t=-2.37， P=0.020）。斜视组主导眼和非主导眼调节幅度分别为（14.1±1.9）D和（14.0±2.2）D，均高于对照组的（12.8±1.7）D和（12.5±1.9）D（ t=2.04， P=0.047； t=2.06， P=0.045）。斜视组的AC/A为2.5（2.5，5.0）PD/D，明显低于对照组的4.1（3.5，5.1）PD/D（ Z=-2.47， P=0.013）。斜视组的远、近融合性散开破裂点、恢复点均高于对照组（均 P<0.05）；远、近融合性辐辏破裂点及近辐辏的恢复点均低于对照组（均 P<0.05）。斜视组的远、近融合性聚散幅度分别为27.0（25.0，35.8）PD和51.0（51.0，61.0）PD，明显高于对照组的10.0（25.0，30.0）PD和25.0（25.0，30.0）PD（ Z=3.91， P<0.001； Z=3.24， P<0.001)。2组间融合状态差异有统计学意义（ χ2=57.00， P<0.001）。斜视组患者的融合状态与集合近点之间呈正相关（ r=0.38， P=0.007）；与远、近融合性散开的破裂点呈负相关（ r=-0.45， P=0.011； r=-0.55， P=0.004）。 结论：:小角度IXT的调节灵敏度低于正常人群，调节幅度高于正常人群；且远、近融合性散开的破裂点和恢复点均高于正常人群，而远、近融合性辐辏的破裂点均低于正常人群。小角度IXT的融合状态与集合近点及远、近融合性散开的破裂点有关系。

Objective::To investigate the characteristics of accommodative and vergence functions in patients with small-angle intermittent exotropia (IXT) and their correlations with fusion status.Methods::This was a prospective cohort study. From January to July 2023, totally 37 patients (74 eyes) with small-angle IXT with a distance deviation of≤30 prism degree (PD) were consecutively recruited from Shanxi Eye Hospital as the strabismus group. Twenty normal individuals (40 eyes) who visited the ophthalmology clinic during the same period were selected as the control group. Distance and near deviation, fusion function, accommodative convergence to accommodation ratio (AC/A), near point of convergence, accommodative amplitude, accommodative facility, accommodative response, positive and negative relative accommodation, and distance and near fusional vergence functions of both groups were examined. Differences of accommodative, vergence, and fusion functions between two groups were compared. Additionally, correlations between accommodative, vergence parameters, and fusion function was analyzed in this study. Independent sample t-test or Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used for between-group comparisons, and Spearman rank correlation analysis was used to assess the correlations between accommodative, vergence parameters, and fusion status. Results::The accommodative facility of the dominant eye and both eyes in the strabismus group was 8.2±3.7 cpm and 7.9±3.7 cpm, lower than that of the control group, which was 10.7±1.9 cpm and 10.4±2.2 cpm ( t=-2.30, P=0.021; t=-2.37, P=0.020). The accommodative amplitude of the dominant and non-dominant eyes in the strabismus group was 14.1±1.9 D and 14.0±2.2 D, higher than that of the control group, which was 12.8±1.7 D and 12.5±1.9 D ( t=2.04, P=0.047; t=2.06, P=0.045). The AC/A ratio in the strabismus group was 2.5 (2.5, 5.0) PD/D, significantly lower than the control group's 4.1(3.5, 5.1) PD/D ( Z=-2.47, P=0.013). The break and recovery points of the distance and near fusional divergence in the strabismus group were higher than those in the control group (all P<0.05). The break points of the distance and near fusional convergence and the recovery points of the near fusional convergence in the strabismus group were lower than those in the control group (all P<0.05). The fusional amplitude of the strabismus group was 27.0 (25.0, 35.8) PD for distance and 51.0 (51.0, 61.0) PD for near, significantly higher than the control group's 10.0 (25.0, 30.0) PD for distance and 25.0 (25.0, 30.0) PD for near ( Z=3.91, P<0.001; Z=3.24, P<0.001). There was a statistically significant difference in fusion status between the two groups ( χ2=57.00, P<0.001). In the strabismus group, fusion status was positively correlated with near convergence ( r=0.38, P=0.007) and negatively correlated with the break points of distance and near fusional divergence ( r=-0.45, P=0.011; r=-0.55, P=0.004). Conclusions::The accommodative facility of small-angle IXT patients is lower than that of the normal population, while the accommodative amplitude is higher. The break and recovery points of distance and near fusional divergence are higher than those of the normal population, while the break points of distant and near fusional convergence are lower than those of the normal population. There are correlations between the near point of convergence, and the break points of both distant and near fusion divergence with the state of fusion.