PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the characteristics of eye movement in children with anisometropic amblyopia, and to compare those characteristics with eye movement in a control group.
METHODS: 31 children in the anisometropic amblyopia group (31 amblyopic eyes in group A, 31 contralateral eyes in group B) and 24 children in the control group (48 eyes in group C). Group A was subdivided into groups Aa (severe amblyopia) and Ab (mild-moderate amblyopia). The overall age range was 6-12 years (mean, 7.83 ± 1.79 years). All children underwent ophthalmic examinations; eye movement parameters including saccade latency and amplitude were evaluated using an Eyelink1000 eye tracker. Data Viewer and MATLAB software were used for data analysis.
RESULTS: Mean and maximum saccade latencies, as well as mean and maximum saccade amplitudes, were significantly greater in group A than in groups B and C before and after treatment (P < 0.05). Mean and maximum saccade latencies were significantly different among groups Aa, Ab, and C (P < 0.05). Pupil trajectories in two detection modes suggested that binocular fixation was better than monocular fixation.
CONCLUSIONS: Eye movement parameters significantly differed between contralateral normal eyes and control eyes. Clinical evaluation of children with anisometropic amblyopia should not focus only on static visual acuity, but also on the assessment of eye movement.
METHODS: 31 children in the anisometropic amblyopia group (31 amblyopic eyes in group A, 31 contralateral eyes in group B) and 24 children in the control group (48 eyes in group C). Group A was subdivided into groups Aa (severe amblyopia) and Ab (mild-moderate amblyopia). The overall age range was 6-12 years (mean, 7.83 ± 1.79 years). All children underwent ophthalmic examinations; eye movement parameters including saccade latency and amplitude were evaluated using an Eyelink1000 eye tracker. Data Viewer and MATLAB software were used for data analysis.
RESULTS: Mean and maximum saccade latencies, as well as mean and maximum saccade amplitudes, were significantly greater in group A than in groups B and C before and after treatment (P < 0.05). Mean and maximum saccade latencies were significantly different among groups Aa, Ab, and C (P < 0.05). Pupil trajectories in two detection modes suggested that binocular fixation was better than monocular fixation.
CONCLUSIONS: Eye movement parameters significantly differed between contralateral normal eyes and control eyes. Clinical evaluation of children with anisometropic amblyopia should not focus only on static visual acuity, but also on the assessment of eye movement.
摘要：
目的：探讨屈光参差性弱视患儿的眼球运动特点，并将这些特征与对照组的眼球运动进行比较。
方法：屈光参差性弱视组31名儿童（A组31只弱视眼，B组31只眼）和对照组24例（C组48只眼）。A组被细分为Aa组(重度弱视)和Ab组(轻度-中度弱视)。总体年龄范围为6-12岁(平均值，7.83±1.79年）。所有儿童均接受眼科检查；使用Eyelink1000眼动仪评估眼球运动参数，包括扫视潜伏期和幅度。使用DataViewer和MATLAB软件进行数据分析。
结果：平均和最大扫视延迟，以及平均和最大扫视幅度，A组治疗前后均显著大于B、C组(P<0.05)。Aa组之间的平均和最大扫视潜伏期显着不同，Ab,C(P<0.05)。两种检测模式下的瞳孔轨迹表明，双眼固定优于单眼固定。
结论：对侧正常眼和对照眼的眼动参数显著不同。屈光参差性弱视患儿的临床评价不应仅仅关注静态视力,而且还要评估眼球运动。
方法：屈光参差性弱视组31名儿童（A组31只弱视眼，B组31只眼）和对照组24例（C组48只眼）。A组被细分为Aa组(重度弱视)和Ab组(轻度-中度弱视)。总体年龄范围为6-12岁(平均值，7.83±1.79年）。所有儿童均接受眼科检查；使用Eyelink1000眼动仪评估眼球运动参数，包括扫视潜伏期和幅度。使用DataViewer和MATLAB软件进行数据分析。
结果：平均和最大扫视延迟，以及平均和最大扫视幅度，A组治疗前后均显著大于B、C组(P<0.05)。Aa组之间的平均和最大扫视潜伏期显着不同，Ab,C(P<0.05)。两种检测模式下的瞳孔轨迹表明，双眼固定优于单眼固定。
结论：对侧正常眼和对照眼的眼动参数显著不同。屈光参差性弱视患儿的临床评价不应仅仅关注静态视力,而且还要评估眼球运动。
