Dataset Information

A Randomized Trial Comparing Part-time Patching with Observation for Intermittent Exotropia in Children 12 to 35 Months of Age.

ABSTRACT: To determine the effectiveness of part-time patching for treating intermittent exotropia (IXT) in young children.Multicenter, randomized clinical trial.Two hundred one children 12 to 35 months of age with untreated IXT meeting the following criteria: (1) IXT at distance OR constant exotropia at distance and either IXT or exophoria at near, and (2) 15-prism diopter (?) or more exodeviation at distance or near by prism and alternate cover test (PACT) but at least 10 ? exodeviation at distance by PACT.Participants were assigned randomly to either observation (no treatment for 6 months) or patching prescribed for 3 hours daily for 5 months, followed by 1 month of no patching.The primary outcome was deterioration, defined as constant exotropia measuring at least 10 ? at distance and near or receipt of nonprotocol treatment for IXT.Of the 177 participants (88%) completing the 6-month primary outcome examination, deterioration occurred in 4.6% (4 of 87) of the participants in the observation group and in 2.2% (2 of 90) of the participants in the patching group (difference, 2.4%; P = 0.27; 95% confidence interval, -3.8% to +9.4%). Motor deterioration occurred in 2.3% (2 of 87) of the observation group and in 2.2% (2 of 90) of the patching group (difference, 0.08%; P = 0.55; 95% confidence interval, -5.8% to +6.1%). For the observation and patching groups, respectively, 6-month mean PACT measurements were 27.9 ? versus 24.9 ? at distance (P = 0.02) and 19.3 ? versus 17.0 ? at near (P = 0.10); 6-month mean exotropia control scores were 2.8 versus 2.3 points at distance (P = 0.02) and 1.4 versus 1.1 points at near (P = 0.26).Among children 12 to 35 months of age with previously untreated IXT, deterioration over 6 months was uncommon, with or without patching treatment. There was insufficient evidence to recommend part-time patching for the treatment of IXT in children in this age group.

SUBMITTER: Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4516562 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Randomized Trial Comparing Part-time Patching with Observation for Intermittent Exotropia in Children 12 to 35 Months of Age.

Mohney Brian G BG Cotter Susan A SA Chandler Danielle L DL Holmes Jonathan M JM Chen Angela M AM Melia Michele M Donahue Sean P SP Wallace David K DK Kraker Raymond T RT Christian Melanie L ML Suh Donny W DW

Ophthalmology 20150611 8

<h4>Purpose</h4>To determine the effectiveness of part-time patching for treating intermittent exotropia (IXT) in young children.<h4>Design</h4>Multicenter, randomized clinical trial.<h4>Participants</h4>Two hundred one children 12 to 35 months of age with untreated IXT meeting the following criteria: (1) IXT at distance OR constant exotropia at distance and either IXT or exophoria at near, and (2) 15-prism diopter (Δ) or more exodeviation at distance or near by prism and alternate cover test (P ...[more]

PMID: 26072346

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of prescribed part-time patching for treatment of intermittent exotropia (IXT) in children.DesignMulticenter, randomized clinical trial.ParticipantsThree hundred fifty-eight children 3 to <11 years of age with previously untreated (except for refractive correction) IXT and near stereoacuity of 400 seconds of arc or better were enrolled. Intermittent exotropia met the following criteria: (1) IXT at distance OR constant exotropia at distance and either IXT or exophoria at near; (2) exodeviation (tropia or phoria) of at least 15 prism diopters (PD) at distance or near by prism and alternate cover test (PACT); and (3) exodeviation of at least 10 PD at distance by PACT.MethodsParticipants were assigned randomly either to observation (no treatment for 6 months) or to patching for 3 hours daily for 5 months, with a 1-month washout period of no patching before the 6-month primary outcome examination.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was deterioration at either the 3-month or the 6-month follow-up visit, defined as: (1) constant exotropia measuring at least 10 PD at distance and near by simultaneous prism and cover test, and/or (2) near stereoacuity decreased by at least 2 octaves from baseline, both assessed by a masked examiner and confirmed by a retest. Participants who were prescribed any nonrandomized treatment without first meeting either deterioration criteria also were counted as having deteriorated.ResultsOf the 324 participants (91%) completing the 6-month primary outcome examination, deterioration occurred in 10 of the 165 participants (6.1%) in the observation group (3 of these 10 started treatment without meeting deterioration criteria) and in 1 of the 159 participants (0.6%) in the part-time patching group (difference, 5.4%; lower limit of 1-sided exact 95% confidence interval, 2.0%; P = 0.004, 1-sided hypothesis test).ConclusionsDeterioration of previously untreated childhood IXT over a 6-month period is uncommon with or without patching treatment. Although there is a slightly lower deterioration rate with patching, both management approaches are reasonable for treating children 3 to 10 years of age with IXT.

Project description:PURPOSE:To describe the course of intermittent exotropia (IXT) in children followed up without treatment for 3 years. DESIGN:Observation arm from randomized trial of short-term occlusion versus observation. PARTICIPANTS:One hundred eighty-three children 3 to 10 years of age with previously untreated IXT and 400 seconds of arc (arcsec) or better near stereoacuity. METHODS:Participants were to receive no treatment unless deterioration criteria were met at a follow-up visit occurring at 3 months, 6 months, or 6-month intervals thereafter for 3 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcome was deterioration by 3 years, defined as meeting motor criterion (constant exotropia ?10 prism diopters [?] at distance and near) or near stereoacuity criterion (?2-octave decrease from best previous measure). For the primary analysis, participants also were considered to have deteriorated if treatment was prescribed without meeting either deterioration criterion. RESULTS:The cumulative probability of protocol-specified deterioration by 3 years was 15% (95% confidence interval, 10%-22%), but that was likely an overestimate, partly because of misclassification. Among 25 deteriorations, 2 met motor deterioration, 11 met stereoacuity deterioration, and 12 started treatment without meeting either criteria (7 for social concern, 1 for diplopia, 4 for other reasons). Among the 132 participants who completed the 3-year visit and had not been treated during the study, only 1 (<1%) met motor or stereoacuity deterioration criteria at 3 years. Of the 4 participants completing the 3-year visit who met deterioration criteria previously and had not started treatment, none still met deterioration criteria. Between the baseline and 3-year examination for these 132 patients, improvement occurred in distance and near stereoacuity (mean improvement, 0.14 and 0.14 logarithm of arcsec; P ? 0.001 and P ? 0.001, respectively), distance exotropia control (mean improvement, 0.6 points; P ? 0.001), and distance exodeviation magnitude (mean improvement, 2.2 ?; P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS:Among children 3 to 10 years of age with IXT for whom surgery was not considered to be the immediately necessary treatment, stereoacuity deterioration or progression to constant exotropia over 3 years was uncommon, and exotropia control, stereoacuity, and magnitude of deviation remained stable or improved slightly.

Project description:BackgroundThe clinical management of intermittent exotropia has been discussed extensively in the literature, yet there remains a lack of clarity regarding indications for intervention, the most effective form of treatment and whether or not there is an optimal time in the evolution of the disease at which any treatment should be carried out.ObjectivesThe objective of this review was to analyse the effects of various surgical and non-surgical treatments in randomised trials of participants with intermittent exotropia, and to report intervention criteria and determine the significance of factors such as age with respect to outcome.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2012), MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2012), EMBASE (January 1980 to May 2012), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to May 2012), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 4 May 2012. We are no longer searching the UK Clinical Trials Gateway (UKCTG) for this review. We manually searched the British Orthoptic Journal up to 2002, and the proceedings of the European Strabismological Association (ESA), International Strabismological Association (ISA) and American Academy of Paediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus meeting (AAPOS) up to 2001. We contacted researchers who are active in the field for information about further published or unpublished studies.Selection criteriaWe included randomised controlled trials of any surgical or non-surgical treatment for intermittent exotropia.Data collection and analysisEach review author independently assessed study abstracts identified from the electronic and manual searches. Author analysis was then compared and full papers for appropriate studies were obtained.Main resultsWe found one randomised trial that was eligible for inclusion. This trial showed that unilateral surgery was more effective than bilateral surgery for correcting the basic type of intermittent exotropia.Authors' conclusionsThe available literature consists mainly of retrospective case reviews, which are difficult to reliably interpret and analyse. The one randomised trial included found unilateral surgery more effective than bilateral surgery for basic intermittent exotropia. However, across all identified studies, measures of severity and thus criteria for intervention are poorly validated, and there appear to be no reliable natural history data. There is therefore a pressing need for improved measures of severity, a better understanding of the natural history and carefully planned clinical trials of treatment to improve the evidence base for the management of this condition.

Project description:PURPOSE:To compare long-term outcomes after bilateral lateral rectus recession (BLRc) or unilateral lateral rectus recession combined with medial rectus resection in the same eye (R&R) for primary treatment of childhood intermittent exotropia (IXT). DESIGN:Multicenter, randomized clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS:One hundred ninety-seven children 3 to younger than 11 years of age with basic-type IXT, a largest deviation by prism and alternate cover test at any distance of 15 to 40 prism diopters (PD), and near stereoacuity of at least 400 seconds of arc. METHODS:Random assignment to BLRc or R&R and masked examinations conducted every 6 months after surgery for 3 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Proportion of participants meeting suboptimal surgical outcome by 3 years, defined as: (1) exotropia of 10 PD or more at distance or near using simultaneous prism and cover test (SPCT); or (2) constant esotropia of 6 PD or more at distance or near using SPCT; (3) loss of 2 octaves or more of stereoacuity from baseline, at any masked examination; or (4) reoperation without meeting any of these criteria. RESULTS:Cumulative probability of suboptimal surgical outcome by 3 years was 46% (43/101) in the BLRc group versus 37% (33/96) in the R&R group (treatment group difference of BLRc minus R&R, 9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6% to 23%). Reoperation by 3 years occurred in 9 participants (10%) in the BLRc group (8 of 9 met suboptimal surgical outcome criteria) and in 4 participants (5%) in the R&R group (3 of 4 met suboptimal surgical outcome criteria; treatment group difference of BLRc minus R&R, 5%; 95% CI, -2% to 13%). Among participants completing the 3-year visit, 29% (25 of 86) in the BLRc group and 17% (13 of 77) in the R&R group underwent reoperation or met suboptimal surgical outcome criteria at 3 years (treatment group difference of BLRc minus R&R, 12%; 95% CI, -1% to 25%). CONCLUSIONS:We did not find a statistically significant difference in suboptimal surgical outcome by 3 years between children with IXT treated with BLRc compared with those treated with R&R. Based on these findings, we are unable to recommend one surgical approach over the other for childhood IXT.

Dataset Information

A Randomized Trial Comparing Part-time Patching with Observation for Intermittent Exotropia in Children 12 to 35 Months of Age.

Publications

A Randomized Trial Comparing Part-time Patching with Observation for Intermittent Exotropia in Children 12 to 35 Months of Age.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure