{"title":"\"Double elevator palsy\" eye supraducts during stage II general anesthesia supporting hypothesis of (supra)nuclear etiology.","authors":"James L Mims","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Double Elevator Palsy (DEP) was originally given its name because the assumption was, that because the affected eye could not elevate in adduction or in abduction, there must be a paresis of both the Superior Rectus (SR) and the Inferior Oblique (IO). Later, it was thought that DEP was due to a paresis of the ipsilateral SR, since the SR is the main elevator of the eye in both adduction and abduction. Gradually, a group of observations accumulated that indicated that the SR was not paretic at all in DEP, leading to the concept that DEP is due to a unilateral deficit in a nucleus that functions to elevate one eye only, a unilateral center for upgaze. The purpose of this paper is to report a clinical case with findings that further support this last hypothesis.</p><p><strong>Case report: </strong>A 15 month old girl presenting with classical signs of DEP of the left eye received a 6 mm recession of the left Inferior Rectus (IR). This was insufficient to eliminate a large chin elevation and a 9 prism diopter left hypotropia in the primary position. At the beginning of the second surgery, at which a vertical transposition of the horizontal muscles of the left eye after the technique of Knapp was planned, it was noticed during anesthesia induction that, as the child passed through stage II of the general anesthesia, both eyes briefly elevated, the DEP affected left eye (post 6 mm IR recession) more than the right. A photograph was taken to record this phenomenon.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusion: </strong>As of this report, there are now at least 4 distinct circumstances under which distinct elevation of eyes diagnosed with DEP have been observed. These 4 include Bell's phenomenon, Dissociated Vertical Deviation of the affected DEP eye, normal upgaze saccades recorded moving from the downgaze position into the primary position, and now elevation during Stage II of a general anesthetic induction. Further, there is no abnormal head posture (head tilt) in patients with DEP, no Bielschowsky phenomenon. All of these pieces of clinical evidence confirm that DEP is not a palsy at all. Instead, they strongly suggest that it is absence of function of a unilateral center for supraduction.</p>","PeriodicalId":79564,"journal":{"name":"Binocular vision & strabismus quarterly","volume":"20 4","pages":"199-204"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Binocular vision & strabismus quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Double Elevator Palsy (DEP) was originally given its name because the assumption was, that because the affected eye could not elevate in adduction or in abduction, there must be a paresis of both the Superior Rectus (SR) and the Inferior Oblique (IO). Later, it was thought that DEP was due to a paresis of the ipsilateral SR, since the SR is the main elevator of the eye in both adduction and abduction. Gradually, a group of observations accumulated that indicated that the SR was not paretic at all in DEP, leading to the concept that DEP is due to a unilateral deficit in a nucleus that functions to elevate one eye only, a unilateral center for upgaze. The purpose of this paper is to report a clinical case with findings that further support this last hypothesis.
Case report: A 15 month old girl presenting with classical signs of DEP of the left eye received a 6 mm recession of the left Inferior Rectus (IR). This was insufficient to eliminate a large chin elevation and a 9 prism diopter left hypotropia in the primary position. At the beginning of the second surgery, at which a vertical transposition of the horizontal muscles of the left eye after the technique of Knapp was planned, it was noticed during anesthesia induction that, as the child passed through stage II of the general anesthesia, both eyes briefly elevated, the DEP affected left eye (post 6 mm IR recession) more than the right. A photograph was taken to record this phenomenon.
Discussion and conclusion: As of this report, there are now at least 4 distinct circumstances under which distinct elevation of eyes diagnosed with DEP have been observed. These 4 include Bell's phenomenon, Dissociated Vertical Deviation of the affected DEP eye, normal upgaze saccades recorded moving from the downgaze position into the primary position, and now elevation during Stage II of a general anesthetic induction. Further, there is no abnormal head posture (head tilt) in patients with DEP, no Bielschowsky phenomenon. All of these pieces of clinical evidence confirm that DEP is not a palsy at all. Instead, they strongly suggest that it is absence of function of a unilateral center for supraduction.
背景:双电梯性麻痹(DEP)最初之所以被命名,是因为它的假设是,由于受影响的眼睛在内收或外展时不能抬起,必须同时存在上直肌(SR)和下斜肌(IO)的瘫瘫。后来,人们认为DEP是由于同侧SR的瘫瘫,因为SR在内收和外展中都是眼睛的主要升降机。渐渐地,一组观察结果表明,在DEP中,SR根本不是轻视性的,这导致了DEP是由于只抬起一只眼睛的核的单侧缺陷,这是一个单侧的向上凝视中心。本文的目的是报告一个临床病例,其发现进一步支持最后一个假设。病例报告:一名15个月大的女孩,表现为左眼DEP的典型症状,左侧下直肌(IR)后退6毫米。这不足以消除大下巴抬高和9棱镜屈光度左斜视在原发位置。在第二次手术开始时,计划在Knapp技术后将左眼的水平肌肉垂直转位,在麻醉诱导期间注意到,当儿童通过全身麻醉II期时,双眼短暂升高,DEP对左眼的影响(后6 mm IR衰退)大于右眼。人们拍了一张照片来记录这一现象。讨论和结论:截至本报告,目前至少有4种不同的情况下,已观察到诊断为DEP的眼睛明显升高。这4项包括Bell现象,受影响的DEP眼的游离垂直偏差,记录的正常上视扫视从下视位置移动到原发位置,现在在全麻诱导的第II阶段升高。此外,DEP患者没有异常的头部姿势(头部倾斜),没有Bielschowsky现象。所有这些临床证据都证实DEP根本不是麻痹。相反,他们强烈认为这是缺乏一个单方面的生产中心的功能。