笔尖训练与双眼视觉训练治疗间歇性外斜视术后欠矫的疗效对比
宋德胜, 陈志钧, 钱晶
南京医科大学附属儿童医院眼科 210008
通讯作者:钱晶(ORCID:0000-0003-1244-8630),Email:13770611814@126.com

第一作者:宋德胜(ORCID:0000-0001-9845-7559),Email:songdesheng123456@163.com

摘要

目的: 比较笔尖训练法和双眼视觉训练法治疗间歇性外斜视患者术后轻度欠矫的疗效。方法: 前瞻性队列研究。纳入在南京医科大学附属儿童医院眼科接受间歇性外斜视手术治疗并于2015年6月至2016年6月发生术后轻度欠矫(-8~-15)的患者54例。将患者分为笔尖训练组和双眼视觉训练组。笔尖训练为将笔尖由远移近到鼻根至出现复视后再退回,患者反复训练,20个周期为1组,连续做 3组,共约15 min,每天2次,每周训练5 d,持续6个月;双眼视觉训练组患者进行每周1次,每次60 min的医院内训练,以及每周5次,每次15 min的家庭训练,持续6个月。所有患者均于训练前,训练1个月、3个月和6个月时接受看远斜视度、看近斜视度和看远立体视检查。数据采用独立样本 t检验、重复测量两因素方差分析、卡方检验进行分析。结果: 54例患者中,26例进行笔尖训练,28例进行双眼视觉训练。训练前笔尖训练组和双眼视觉训练组的看远、看近斜视度差异无统计学意义;训练3个月时,笔尖训练组看远、看近斜视度均大于双眼视觉训练组,差异有统计学意义( t=3.44, P<0.001; t=2.55, P=0.01)。双眼视觉训练组训练1个月和3个月时看远斜视度差值、看近斜视度差值均大于笔尖训练组,差异有统计学意义( t=-3.17, P=0.003; t=2.32, P=0.02)。训练1个月、3个月时, 2组看远立体视差异无统计学意义;训练6个月时,双眼视觉训练组看远立体视优于笔尖训练组,差异有统计学意义( t=9.33, P<0.001),训练6个月时,双眼视觉训练组正常立体视获得率高于笔尖训练组,差异有统计学意义( χ2=5.02, P=0.03)。结论: 笔尖训练和双眼视觉训练均能降低间歇性外斜视术后欠矫患者斜视度,效果一致,但双眼视觉训练对欠矫患儿立体视功能的恢复优于笔尖训练。

关键词: 间歇性外斜视; 笔尖训练; 双眼视觉训练
Comparative Study of Pencil Push-Up Training versus Binocular Vision Training for a Slight Postoperative Undercorrection of Intermittent Exotropia
Desheng Song, Zhijun Chen, Jing Qian
Department of Ophthalmology, Children's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210008, China
Corresponding author:Jing Qian, Department of Ophthalmology, Children's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 21008, China (Email: 13770611814@126.com)
Abstract

Objective: To compare the efficacy of vision training and pencil push-ups as treatments for patients with small-angle exodeviation after surgery for intermittent exotropia.Methods: A controlled clinical trial was performed. Patients who presented with small-angle exodeviation (15> exotropia >8) after surgery for intermittent exotropia were recruited in Children's Hospital of Nanjing Medical Uviverstiy from June 2015 to June 2016. Fifty-four patients were divided into a vision training group (28) and a pencil push-up group (26). Patients in the pencil push-up group were instructed to hold a pencil at arm's length directly between their eyes. They were asked to continue moving the pencil slowly toward their nose until it could no longer be seen as a single image and then try to get the pencil point back into a single image. Patients were instructed to do 3 sets of 20 pencil push-ups per day at home, 5 days per week for 6 months. This treatment required an average of 15 minutes per day. Patients in the vision training group received therapy administered by a trained therapist during a weekly 60-minute office visit, with additional procedures to be performed at home for 15 minutes a day, 5 times per week for 6 months. Tests were performed before training and compared to results at 1, 3 and 6 months after training, including exodeviation at distance and near, and stereoacuity at distance. An independent samples t test, two-way repeated measures ANOVA, a paired t test and chi-square test were used for statistical analysis.Results: At 1 month and 6 months after training, the magnitude of the exodeviation between the pencil push-up group and the vision training group at distance and near was not significantly different. However, there was a significant difference between groups at 3 months after training, demonstrating a higher magnitude of exodeviation in the pencil push-up group than in the vision training group ( t=3.44, P<0.001; t=2.55, P=0.01). The difference in the magnitude of exodeviation at distance and near between 1 month and 3 months after training was significant ( t=-3.17, P=0.003; t=2.32, P=0.02). At 1 month and 3 months after training, the magnitude of stereoacuity at distance between the pencil push-up group and vision training group was not significantly different, However, there was a significant difference between the two groups at 6 months, demonstrating a better stereoacuity in the vision training group than in the pencil push-up group ( t=9.33, P<0.001). At 6 months after training, the normal stereoscopic acquisition rate of the vision training group was higher than that of the pencil push-up group ( χ2=5.02, P=0.03).Conclusions: Both vision training and pencil push-up training can effectively decrease the magnitude of small-angle exodeviation after surgery for intermittent exotropia. However, vision training has a better effect on stereoacuity.

Keyword: intermittent exotropia; pencil push-up; vision therapy

间歇性外斜视(Intermittent exotropia, IXT)为临床最常见的斜视类型, 占所有外斜视患者的50%~90%[1], 手术为其最常用的治疗手段, IXT术后残余性和复发性外斜视的发生率为22%~59%[2, 3], 是影响IXT术后长期疗效的主要原因。术后斜视度在-8~+5(正表示内斜视, 负表示外斜视)为IXT手术成功的标准[4], IXT水平外斜视度数≥ 15为手术指征[5], IXT术后斜视度位于-8~-15为手术成功和再次手术之间的一个过渡阶段, 通常需要行再次手术。临床工作发现, 二次手术不仅给患儿及家属造成身体及心理压力, 也会给手术医师带来一定的心理负担, 并且有研究表明, 双眼视功能对维持术后眼位至关重要, 双眼视功能降低是导致IXT术后复发的主要原因[2, 3, 4]。若术后外斜视度小于15, 给予适当的功能训练, 增加患儿对斜视的控制力, 或可避免再次手术, 临床实践中视觉功能训练方法主要有笔尖训练和医院内与家庭训练结合的双眼视觉训练, 笔尖训练法简单易行, 缺乏试验支持, 医院内与家庭训练结合的双眼视觉训练为临床证明行之有效的方法[6], 但过程繁琐, 操作困难。本研究对2015年6月至2016年6月期间在南京医科大学附属儿童医院眼科进行笔尖训练和双眼视觉训练的54例IXT术后轻度欠矫病例进行比较分析, 观察2种训练方法治疗IXT术后斜视度为-8~-15的患儿的疗效, 判断笔尖训练法是否可作为常规训练方式进行推广。

1 对象与方法
1.1 对象

纳入标准:①年龄5~18岁; ②双眼矫正视力≥ 0.8, 屈光参差≤ 1.50 D; ③看远立体视≤ 3 000 ″; ④基本型或集合不足型IXT, 斜视术后残留外斜度8~15(看远、看近满足1项即可); ⑤愿意严格按照要求进行功能训练, 能够配合各项检查; ⑥无影响双眼视的各种功能性和器质性眼病。

排除标准:①恒定性斜视; ②合并垂直分离性斜视(Dissociated vertical deviation, DVD), A或V征, 麻痹、限制性因素, 显性或隐性眼球震颤; ③中度、重度弱视。

纳入曾在我院接受IXT手术治疗并于2015年 6月至2016年6月期间发生欠矫的患者54例。所有参与者均在研究前被告知研究目的, 征求患者同意后方可纳入研究队列。向患者家属充分说明每种训练方法的优缺点, 患者家属自愿选择进行何种训练。本研究遵循赫尔辛基宣言, 参加研究前患者及家属均签署知情同意书。

1.2 术前检查

所有患者训练前均接受视力检查、主觉验光、客观电脑验光、裂隙灯显微镜、间接检眼镜、眼球运动、斜视度(遮盖单眼1 h)、看远立体视等检查。斜视度测量采用三棱镜+交替遮盖法, 测量看近斜视度视标放至眼前33 cm处, 看远斜视度视标放至6 m处, 均由同一检查者进行测量。

使用随机点立体图测量看远立体视(6 m), 立体视锐度≤ 80 ″为黄斑中心凹立体视, 定义为正常立体视; 立体视锐度> 80 ″为异常立体视。通过立体盲筛查图而未通过800 ″立体图检查者记录为3 000 ″。

1.3 训练方法

笔尖训练组:患者手握铅笔置于两眼之间, 笔尖距鼻根部一臂距离并与鼻根等高, 由远移近到出现复视后再退回原处反复训练, 20个周期为1组, 连续做3组, 共约15 min, 每天2次, 每周训练5 d, 持续6个月。

双眼视觉训练组:由视光师对患者进行每周1次, 每次60 min的院内训练; 患者进行每周5次, 每次15 min的家庭训练, 持续6个月。院内训练和家庭训练具体细节参照文献[7]和[8], 每例患者均给予一个个性化训练指南。院内治疗期间患者在监督下练习4~5个疗程, 治疗师遵循标准方案中训练方法。

1.4 随访

训练1、3、6个月时进行看远、看近斜视度, 看远立体视测量。术后眼位在-8~+5(包括-8和+5)为正位, 内斜度数> 5为过矫, 外斜度数> 8为欠矫或复发。

1.5 治疗方案遵循情况

家长在准备好的日历上记录每天家庭训练的时间, 评估患者对家庭治疗方案的遵守情况。每隔1周进行审查。通过日历确认患者完成情况, 对于配合不佳患者, 会采取干预措施, 比如给予不同的奖励。

1.6 统计学方法

前瞻性队列研究。采用SPSS 20.0统计学软件进行数据分析。观测数据主要为计量资料, 符合正态分布以均数± 标准差表示。多时点观测资料行重复测量两因素方差分析, 卡方检验统计2组远立体视获得率之间的差异。组内比较时, 调整显著性水准为P1< 0.05/3< 0.017, 其他比较的显著性水准为P< 0.05。

2 结果
2.1 基本资料

共56例患者符合入选标准, 笔尖训练组26例, 其中男16例, 女10例。双眼视觉训练组28例, 男12例, 女16例, 笔尖训练组和双眼视觉训练组各有1例失访。随访结束后, 54例患者的完成情况都达标。训练前笔尖训练组和双眼视觉训练组年龄、最佳矫正视力、等效球镜度、看远看近斜视度、看远立体视差异比较均无统计学意义(P> 0.05), 见表1

表1 间歇性外斜视术后欠矫患者训练前基线特征 Table 1 Baseline data of patients with a slight postoperative undercorrection of intermittent exotropia before pencil push-up and binocular vision training
2.2 2种训练法对术后看远斜视度影响的比较

训练方法和训练时间的交互作用对看远斜视度的影响差异有统计学意义(F交互作用=5.59, P=0.002), 因此对2组对象训练方法和时间进行单独效应的检验。组间的整体差异无统计学意义(F分组=0.01, P=0.86), 训练前、训练1个月和6个月时, 双眼视觉训练组与笔尖训练组看远斜视度差异均无统计学意义(t=-1.15、-1.63、1.58, 均P> 0.05), 但训练3个月时, 双眼视觉训练组看远斜视度小于笔尖训练组, 差异有统计学意义(t=3.44, P< 0.001)。时间的整体差异有统计学意义(F时间=5.60, P< 0.001), 笔尖训练组和双眼视觉训练组看远外斜视度随训练时间延长而降低(F=172.20, P< 0.001; F=235.37, P< 0.001), 见表2。双眼视觉训练组训练3个月与训练1个月时看远斜视度差值大于笔尖训练组, 差异有统计学意义(t=-3.17, P=0.003); 训练1个月与训练前时差值, 训练6个月与训练3个月时差值与笔尖训练组比较差异均无统计学意义(t=0.27, P=0.79; t=-1.94, P=0.06), 见图1。

表2 笔尖训练组和双眼视觉训练组看远斜视度比较(PD) Table 2 Comparison of distance deviation (PD) in the pencil push-up and binocular vision training groups

图1. 不同训练时间点看远斜视度差值比较
与笔尖训练组比较, aP< 0.05。DG1-G0:训练1个月时与训练前看远斜视度的差值; DG3-G1:训练3个月与训练1个月时看远斜视度的差值; DG6-G3:训练6个月与训练3个月时看远斜视度的差值
Figure 1. Comparison of distance deviation at different follow-up times.
Compared with the pencil push-up training group, aP< 0.05. DG1-G0: The difference in distance deviation between 1 day before training and 1 month after training; DG3-G1: The difference in distance deviation between 1month and 3 months after training; DG6-G3: The difference in distance deviation between 3 months and 6 months after training.

2.3 2种训练法对术后看近斜视度影响的比较

笔尖训练组和双眼视觉训练组训练前后不同时间点看近斜视度总体比较差异均有统计学意义(F分组=4.36, P=0.04; F时间=234.70, P< 0.001; F交互作用=2.44, P=0.08)。其中2个组患者看近外斜视度随训练时间延长而降低(F=117.06, P< 0.001; F=119.43, P< 0.001), 训练前、训练1个月和6个月时, 双眼视觉训练组与笔尖训练组看近斜视度差异均无统计学意义(t=-0.32、1.18、0.43, 均P> 0.05), 但双眼视觉训练患者训练后3个月看近斜视度明显低于笔尖训练组, 差异有统计学意义(t=2.55, P=0.01), 见表3。双眼视觉训练组训练1个月与训练3个月时看近斜视度的差值大于笔尖训练组(t=2.32, P=0.02), 2组训练前与训练1个月时的差值, 训练3个月与训练6个月时的差值差异均无统计学意义(t=-1.03, P=0.31; t=-1.26, P=0.21) (见表3, 图2)。

表3 笔尖训练组和双眼视觉训练组看近斜视度比较(PD) Table 3 Comparison of near deviation (PD) in the pencil push-up and binocular vision training groups

图2. 不同训练时间点看近斜视度差值比较
与笔尖训练组比较, aP< 0.05。DG1-G0:训练1个月时与训练前看近斜视度的差值; DG3-G1:训练3个月与训练1个月时看近斜视度的差值; DG6-G3:训练6个月与训练3个月时看近斜视度的差值
Figure 2. Comparison of near deviation at different follow-up times.
Compared with the pencil push-up group, aP< 0.05. DG1-G0: The difference innear deviation between 1 day before training and 1 monthafter training; DG3-G1: The difference innear deviation between 1 month and 3 months after training; DG6-G3: The difference innear deviation between 3 months and 6 months after training.

2.4 训练后欠矫过矫情况

训练6个月, 笔尖训练组3名患者看远看近斜视度仍大于-8, 双眼视觉训练组均达到成功标准。2组未见训练后过矫情况。

2.5 2种训练法对术后看远立体视影响的比较

训练方法和训练时间的交互作用对看远立体视的影响差异有统计学意义(F交互作用=5.30, P=0.003), 因此对2组受试者内因素训练方法和时间进行单独 效应的检验。组间的整体差异无统计学意义(F分组= 0.03, P=0.89), 训练前、训练1个月和3个月时, 双眼视觉训练组与笔尖训练组看远立体视差异均无统计学意义(t=-1.04、-0.59、0.36, 均P> 0.05); 但训练6个月时, 双眼视觉训练组看远立体视优于笔尖训练组, 差异有统计学意义(t=9.33, P< 0.001)。时间的整体差异有统计学意义(F时间=74.71, P< 0.001), 笔尖训练组和双眼视觉训练组看远立体视随训练时间延长而提高(F=136.21, P< 0.001; F=200.35, P< 0.001), 见表4。训练前, 笔尖训练组与双眼视觉训练组均无一例有正常立体视, 训练6个月后笔尖训练组2例, 双眼视训练组9例获得正常立体视, 差异有统计学意义(χ 2=5.02, P=0.03)。

表4 笔尖训练组和双眼视觉训练组看远立体视比较(弧秒) Table 4 Comparison of distance stereoacuity (arcsecond) in the pencil push-up group and binocular vision training groups
3 讨论

IXT是一种常见的眼科疾病, 手术治愈尚缺乏统一标准, Chia等[9], Figueira和Hing[10], 李苑和吴晓[11]将手术成功定义为术后第一眼位斜视度保持在± 10之间; Lee等[12]认为保持在± 8之间比较合适; Maruo等[13]和Yuksel等[14]在文献中更是将手术成功定义在± 20之间; Choi等[15]和Kushner[16]表示术后内斜视度≤ 5, 外斜视度≤ 10较为满意; Wang等[4]研究发现外斜视度≤ 8可获得黄斑外双眼单视, 认为内斜视度≤ 5, 外斜视度≤ 8为手术成功标准, 本研究采用Wang等[4]关于手术成功的定义。手术成功定义的另一层含义为:外斜度≤ 8不需要外界干预。

IXT术后水平外斜视≥ 15为手术起点, 此时不主张训练, 因训练的目的是动员患者的自主辐辏, 使患者在疲劳或神经不稳定出现外斜位时, 可借意志辐辏加以克服。外斜度大, 中心凹抑制很顽固, 融合力较差, 若单独训练出过强的辐辏, 手术后因无融合力加以控制, 势必产生辐辏过强即内斜的倾向, 而发生主觉复视。这种复视给患者带来的困扰比原来外斜症状更不易克服。IXT术后轻度欠矫(-8~-15)患者, 未达到手术标准, 若不进行及时干预, 可因外斜漂移造成IXT复发, 研究表明, 外斜视术后远期复发率6.4%~68.5%不等[15, 17, 18, 19]。此时若进行功能训练或可避免二次手术。

笔尖训练法由于简单易学, 无需随访, 无需费用, 逐渐在临床获得普及。院内训练需进行每周一次的医院内训练。如果笔尖训练被临床试验证实效果与院内训练相似, 将会节省大量的医疗保健支出, 减轻患者负担。

国内尚缺乏这方面的报道, 集合不足临床训练较为成熟, 并形成一套完整的训练流程和评价体系[7], 集合不足患者与本研究患者虽来源不同, 但训练目的相同, 皆为增加患者的双眼视功能, 训练方法完全一致。本研究严格按照集合不足患者训练流程进行训练, 且此特定训练方法被证实行之有效。

笔尖训练法和双眼视觉训练法均能使患者看远、看近外斜视度逐渐减小, 这种改变兼有统计学意义和临床意义。训练前2组患者看远看近斜视度差异虽无统计学意义, 双眼视觉训练组斜视度却均大于笔尖训练组; 训练3个月时, 双眼视觉训练组斜视度开始小于笔尖训练组, 差异存在统计学意义; 并且双眼视觉训练组训练1个月与训练3个月时的斜视度差值大于笔尖训练组, 差异有统计学意义。这可能是因为笔尖训练组易于理解和操作, 不存在学习周期, 双眼视觉训练操作复杂, 受学习周期影响, 早期效果不如笔尖训练组。训练6个月时, 2组斜视度差异无统计学意义, 可以理解2种训练均处于稳定水平, 增加训练时间或可继续减小斜视度, 但由于一般正常人大部分为外隐斜原因, 效果应不会明显, 尚需试验验证。训练后1个月与训练前立体视差异不明显, 训练3个月时开始出现差异, 但2组比较差别不大, 训练6个月后双眼视觉训练组立体视功能优于笔尖训练组, 差异有统计学意义。并且训练6个月时, 双眼视觉训练组正常立体视获得率高于笔尖训练组。训练6个月时, 2组患者斜视度差异无统计学意义, 但看远立体视差异却有统计学意义。

综上所述, 笔尖训练和双眼视觉训练均能使欠矫患者斜视度减小, 并维持在一个稳定水平, 但若能早期掌握双眼视觉训练方法, 其降低斜视度速度更快。两者虽均能降低外斜度, 但双眼视觉训练对功能的治愈要优于笔尖训练。临床医师或视觉训练师在选择训练方法时要综合考虑金钱、效率、效果等诸多因素, 选择对目标对象最为有利的方法进行个体化训练。

利益冲突申明 本研究无任何利益冲突

作者贡献声明 宋德胜:收集数据; 参与选题、设计及资料的分析和解释; 撰写论文; 根据编辑部的修改意见进行修改。陈志钧:参与选题、设计和修改论文的结果、结论。钱晶:参与修改论文中关键性结果、结论; 根据编辑部的修改意见进行核修

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

参考文献
[1] Nusz KJ, Mohney BG, Diehl NN. The course of intermittent exotropia in a population-based cohort. Ophthalmology, 2006, 113(7): 1154-1158. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.01.033. [本文引用:1]
[2] Park JH, Kim SH. Clinical features and the risk factors of infantile exotropia recurrence. Am J Ophthalmol, 2010, 150(4): 464-467. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2010.05.004. [本文引用:2]
[3] Lim SH, Hwang BS, Kim MM. Prognostic factors for recurrence after bilateral rectus recession procedure in patients with intermittent exotropia. Eye (Lond), 2012, 26(6): 846-852. DOI: 10.1038/eye.2012.55. [本文引用:2]
[4] Wang L, Wu Q, Kong X, et al. Comparison of bilateral lateral rectus recession and unilateral recession resection for basic type intermittent exotropia in children. Br J Ophthalmol, 2013, 97(7): 870-873. DOI: 10.1136/bjophtha-lmol-2013-303167. [本文引用:4]
[5] 李以跑, 汪育文. 视功能训练对间歇性外斜视术后小角度外斜视的疗效. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2016, 18(10): 608-612. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2016.10.007. [本文引用:1]
[6] 赵堪兴. 斜视矫正术设计的思考. 中华眼科杂志, 2002, 38(8): 507-509. DOI: 10.3760/j:issn:0412-4081.2002.08.019. [本文引用:1]
[7] Scheiman M, Wick B. Clinical management of binocular vision: Heterophoric, accommodative, and eye movement disorders. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2008. [本文引用:2]
[8] Scheiman M, Mitchell GL, Cotter S, et al. A rand omized clinical trial of treatments for convergence insufficiency in children. Arch Ophthalmol, 2005, 123(1): 14-24. DOI: 10.1001/archopht.123.1.14. [本文引用:1]
[9] Chia A, Seenyen L, Long QB. Surgical experiences with two-muscle surgery for the treatment of intermittent exotropia. JAAPOS, 2006, 10(3): 206-211. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2005.11.015. [本文引用:1]
[10] Figueira EC, Hing S. Intermittent exotropia: Comparison of treatments. Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 2006, 34(3): 245-251. DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2006.01199.x. [本文引用:1]
[11] 李苑, 吴晓. A型肉毒毒素治疗儿童间歇性外斜视的临床观察. 中华眼科杂志, 2008, 44(11): 967-971. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn.0412-4081.2008.11.003. [本文引用:1]
[12] Lee SY, Lee YC. Relationship between motor alignment at postoperative day 1 and at year 1 after symmetric and asymmetric surgery in intermittent exotropia. Jpn J Ophthalmol, 2001, 45(2): 167-171. [本文引用:1]
[13] Maruo T, Kubota N, Sakaue T, et al. Intermittent exotropia surgery in children: Long term outcome regarding changes in binocular alignment. A study of 666 cases. Binocul Vis Strabismus Q, 2000, 16(4): 265-270. [本文引用:1]
[14] Yuksel D, Spiritus M, Vand elannoitte S. Symmetric or asymmetric surgery for basic intermittent exotropia. Bull Soc Belge Ophtalmol, 1998, 268: 195-199. [本文引用:1]
[15] Choi J, Chang JW, Kim SJ, et al. The long-term survival analysis of bilateral lateral rectus recession versus unilateral recession-resection for intermittent exotropia. Am J Ophthalmol, 2012, 153(2): 343-351. e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2011.06.024. [本文引用:2]
[16] Kushner BJ. Selective surgery for intermittent exotropia based on distance/near differences. Arch Ophthalmol, 1998, 116(3): 324-328. [本文引用:1]
[17] Suh SY, Choi J, Kim SJ. Comparative study of lateral rectus recession versus recession-resection in unilateral surgery for intermittent exotropia. JAAPOS, 2015, 19(6): 507-511. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2015.08.011. [本文引用:1]
[18] Kim H, Yang HK, Hwang JM. Comparison of long-term surgical outcomes between unilateral recession and unilateral recession-resection in small-angle exotropia. Am J Ophthalmol, 2016, 166: 141-148. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2016.03.047. [本文引用:1]
[19] 吴其正, 王晓明, 王利华, . 单眼外直肌后徙术治疗儿童间歇性外斜视的疗效. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2012, 14(1): 34-37. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2012.01.009. [本文引用:1]