Surgical under- and overcorrection of horizontal tropia is a problem that frequently confronts the strabismus surgeon. Inadequate preoperative evaluation, high hyperopia, amblyopia, and insufficient or excessive correction have been mentioned as responsible factors.
17 18 19 20 21 Therefore, a careful preoperative evaluation is mandatory for the management of consecutive strabismus. However, information on the preoperative condition and the surgical procedure performed may be inaccessible, because the same surgeon (or sometimes a different one) may be called on to treat secondary strabismus even many years later. Preoperative images, parents’ reports, and the slit lamp examination of conjunctival scars may be the only available means to obtain information on the clinical history. Because of postoperative alterations in anatomy,
22 other data are collected before surgery with the “duction test,” and during surgery, checking whether, for example, a Faden operation or a vertical displacement was performed and measuring the corneoscleral limbus-to-insertion muscle site distance.
23
Orbital imaging techniques can be helpful in the preoperative evaluation of patients without available information regarding prior surgery, provided that the corneoscleral limbus and insertion muscle can be clearly displayed. For this purpose, we propose the use of US to detect surgical muscle recession by measurement of corneoscleral limbus-to-insertion site distance.
Other imaging techniques include computed tomographic (CT) scans and high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which can demonstrate the origin and course of the extraocular muscles with sufficient detail. Cine MRI, which is performed in different gaze positions to produce a video recording of ocular movements,
24 has also been used to analyze restrictive motility disorders.
25 MRI is generally superior to CT scans in delineating soft tissues.
26 Indeed, various parts of the connective tissue of the extraocular muscles can be well evaluated by MRI because of the sharp contrast between hyperintense orbital fat and hypointense connective structures. However, because of the varying arc of contact and the isointensity of tendon and scleral tissue, an exact determination of the extraocular muscle insertion is not currently possible.
27
The high resolution of modern B scanners seems to allow a more effective anatomic visualization and measurement of extraocular muscles and the detection of subtle or early changes in muscle size.
28 29 The real-time display, the smaller length of the US examination, and lower cost are additional advantages of this technique.
We studied the reliability of US readings of the distance from the corneoscleral limbus to the insertion site of the MR and LR muscle in two groups of patients, with either surgical strabismus failure or with untreated strabismus, evaluating the degree of agreement with intraoperative measurements and their reproducibility.
Ultrasound test–retest variability was greater in comparison to intraoperative direct measurement. This difference was most significant for the LR muscle (0.81 and 0.68 mm vs. 0.23 and 0.06 mm for the LR muscle, 0.25 and 0.18 mm vs. 0.19 and 0.08 mm for the MR muscle, in the operated and untreated eyes, respectively). Possible explanations of the LR finding, in our opinion, are related to more difficulty in identifying the US landmarks for the LR than for the MR muscle. Indeed, a good visualization of these landmarks (i.e., the inserting tendon and the anterior chamber angle) needs both a maximally posterior probe angle, limited by the nose in the LR muscle examination, and extreme duction, physiologically less effective for the LR than for the MR muscle.
When considering the coefficient of variation, the US measurements were reliable, especially in the group of patients who underwent surgical recession and for the MR muscle. As to the surgical group, the good reproducibility may be due to the greater mean distance from limbus to muscle insertion site of the recessed muscles (12.36 and 11.05 mm in the surgical eyes vs. 5.61 and 5.76 mm in the untreated eyes, for the MR and LR muscles respectively), whereas, as to the MR muscle, it may depend on the lower US test–retest variability for this muscle than for the LR one.
The mean relative error for US measurements ranged from −7.69% to 12.21%, showing higher errors in the surgical group than in the untreated one, with larger US than intraoperative measurements in all groups but in the LR muscle of the untreated eyes (see
Table 3 ). This finding is better defined by the 95% limits of agreement (range within which the discrepancies will lie in 95% of cases: −0.49 to 1.12 mm) between US and actual intraoperative measurements. A major reason for the larger US measurements may be the different point used as reference for the measurements at the muscle insertion site. US readings were performed from the posterior face of the insertion tendon, whereas intraoperative measurements were from its anterior face. Postsurgical alterations in anatomy (i.e., unpredictable adhesions at the posterior face of the recessed tendon) may further influence the disagreement. From another viewpoint, the difficult US display of the muscle insertion area during LR measurements may account for additional variability.
The clinical use of US for detection and assessment of surgical recession of horizontal rectus muscles depends therefore on the maximum amount of discrepancy found between US and intraoperative measurements. Specifically, adding the mean +2 SD of such a discrepancy to the maximum insertion site-to-limbus distance indicated in the literature for the examined muscle in a population of similar age and refractive status, we obtain a value beyond which we can assume a muscle recession was performed. For instance, if we consider the MR rectus muscle of emmetropic eyes, adding the specific discrepancy value (2.47 mm = 0.65 + 1.82, mean + 2 SD) to the maximum value classically reported for the insertion site-to-limbus distance by Fuchs
1 in cadaveric eyes (6.7 mm), we obtain 9.17 mm. Each US insertion site-to-limbus distance exceeding such a value may reasonably indicate that a surgical recession was performed. Nevertheless, a quantitative evaluation of the amount of performed recession seemed not to be particularly accurate.
In conclusion, we found echographic measurements to be reliable with good indices of reproducibility; however, the 95% limits of agreement between US and actual intraoperative readings may be considered too inadequate to use US for research purposes. US evaluation is harmless, inexpensive, well tolerated, and repeatable, but it requires a skilled US examiner. Although the accuracy is not particularly high, US provides better visualization of the insertion muscle site–limbus region compared with other imaging techniques. Specifically, its use in surgically treated horizontal rectus muscles could allow for the detection and assessment of surgical recession, as well as the recognition of the real insertion, sometimes postsurgically modified by unpredictable adhesions. Thus, besides the well-known role of echography in the diagnosis of extraocular muscle disorders, the present study suggests a further potential use of the technique in patients with strabismus with surgical failure and missing preoperative clinical data.