Prevalence of Amblyogenic Risk Factors in Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction in a Developing Country

U. Raina, Shruti Bhattacharya, S. Gupta, Varun Saini, Banu Pavitra, Kumar Ravinesh, R. Cruz
{"title":"Prevalence of Amblyogenic Risk Factors in Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction in a Developing Country","authors":"U. Raina, Shruti Bhattacharya, S. Gupta, Varun Saini, Banu Pavitra, Kumar Ravinesh, R. Cruz","doi":"10.11648/J.IJOVS.20210603.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE: Conventionally, congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO) has been treated as an entity with no bearing on development of visual acuity and routine refraction is not done considering the volume of patients in a in a developing Asian country like India. This research was designed to study the prevalence of amblyogenic refractive error in patients with congenital NLDO, as compared to an age-matched control group, in a developing country. METHODS: In this study, 89 patients with congenital NLDO and 78 patients as age matched controls, less than 4 years of age were included at a tertiary care centre in India. All underwent a complete ocular examination and risk factors for amblyogenic refractive error were noted based on the AAPOS guidelines. RESULTS: There was no gender predisposition and no significant difference between the two groups in terms of mode of delivery, orthoptic check-up, keratometry, axial length, fundus or anterior segment examination. Amblyogenic refractive error, as defined by the AAPOS guidelines, was found in 18 (20.5%) patients in the case group compared to 3 (3.8%) in the control group, and this was as follows: astigmatism in 10, anisometropia in 5, hyperopia in 3 subjects, and myopia in 1. These risk factors were not greater in children with unilateral NLDO compared to bilateral NLDO, but both were greater than their control group. There was also no significant difference found between the two groups in terms of distribution of anisometropia. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of amblyogenic refractive error in congenital NLDO was significantly higher than in the control group. Hence, a thorough evaluation is warranted in cases of congenital NLDO for early detection amblyogenic refractive error.","PeriodicalId":14184,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Ophthalmology & Visual Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Ophthalmology & Visual Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11648/J.IJOVS.20210603.15","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

PURPOSE: Conventionally, congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO) has been treated as an entity with no bearing on development of visual acuity and routine refraction is not done considering the volume of patients in a in a developing Asian country like India. This research was designed to study the prevalence of amblyogenic refractive error in patients with congenital NLDO, as compared to an age-matched control group, in a developing country. METHODS: In this study, 89 patients with congenital NLDO and 78 patients as age matched controls, less than 4 years of age were included at a tertiary care centre in India. All underwent a complete ocular examination and risk factors for amblyogenic refractive error were noted based on the AAPOS guidelines. RESULTS: There was no gender predisposition and no significant difference between the two groups in terms of mode of delivery, orthoptic check-up, keratometry, axial length, fundus or anterior segment examination. Amblyogenic refractive error, as defined by the AAPOS guidelines, was found in 18 (20.5%) patients in the case group compared to 3 (3.8%) in the control group, and this was as follows: astigmatism in 10, anisometropia in 5, hyperopia in 3 subjects, and myopia in 1. These risk factors were not greater in children with unilateral NLDO compared to bilateral NLDO, but both were greater than their control group. There was also no significant difference found between the two groups in terms of distribution of anisometropia. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of amblyogenic refractive error in congenital NLDO was significantly higher than in the control group. Hence, a thorough evaluation is warranted in cases of congenital NLDO for early detection amblyogenic refractive error.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
发展中国家先天性鼻泪管梗阻中致畸危险因素的患病率
目的:传统上,先天性鼻泪管阻塞(NLDO)一直被视为一个与视力发展无关的实体,考虑到印度等亚洲发展中国家的患者数量,常规屈光检查未进行。本研究旨在研究发展中国家先天性NLDO患者的弱视屈光不正患病率,并与年龄匹配的对照组进行比较。方法:在这项研究中,89例先天性NLDO患者和78例年龄匹配的对照组,年龄小于4岁,包括在印度的三级保健中心。所有患者都接受了完整的眼部检查,并根据AAPOS指南记录了弱视性屈光不正的危险因素。结果:两组在分娩方式、正视检查、角膜测量、眼轴长度、眼底及前段检查方面无性别易感性,差异无统计学意义。AAPOS指南定义的弱视性屈光不正,病例组有18例(20.5%),对照组有3例(3.8%),具体情况如下:散光10例,屈光参差5例,远视3例,近视1例。这些危险因素在单侧NLDO患儿中并不比双侧NLDO患儿更大,但两者均高于对照组。在屈光参差的分布方面,两组之间也没有显著差异。结论:先天性NLDO患者的屈光不正发生率明显高于对照组。因此,在先天性NLDO的病例中,为了早期发现弱视性屈光不正,需要进行彻底的评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Prevalence of Amblyogenic Risk Factors in Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction in a Developing Country Macular Hole Following Retained Subfoveal PFCL Treatment Burden and Quality of Life of Patients with Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration (nAMD) and Their Caregivers—A Review Internal Audit as a Quality Assurance Tool to Ensure Staff and Patient Safety During COVID-19 Pandemic A Case History of Internal Ophthalmomyiasis, a Rare and Devastating Disease
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1