This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

M. Edward Wilson, MD; Scott K. McClatchey, MD
Bethesda, Md

Arch Ophthalmol. 1990;108(4):476-477.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—We read with interest the article by Kushner et al¹ in the November 1989 issue of the ARCHIVES. The authors found a significant inverse correlation between axial length and response to surgery in patients with esotropia. They implied that the axial length variation was the cause of a portion of the variability found with strabismus surgery. They suggest that a surgical formula designed to take axial length into account would decrease that variability.

We question these conclusions based on the following concerns. Most importantly, the population of esotropia patients on which this study was based is heterogeneous. It can be divided into two quite different groups, those with congenital esotropia and those with acquired esotropia (including decompensated accommodative esotropia). These two groups of patients differ in age of onset of strabismus and in average quantity of esotropia. Patients with congenital esotropia are usually operated on between . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?