Can Clinical Measures of Postoperative Binocular Function Predict the Long-Term Stability of Postoperative Alignment in Intermittent Exotropia?

Table 3

Postoperative exodrift between subgroups.

Exodrift∗ (pd)	Distance measurement										Near measurement
	Fusion					Stereoacuity					Fusion					Stereoacuity
	Present	n	Absent	n	p^§	High-grade	n	Moderate-low-grade	n	p^§	Present	n	Absent	n	p^§	High-grade	n	Moderate-low-grade	n	p^§
From postoperative month 1 to month 6^†	4.4 ± 6.6	30	1.4 ± 4.9	5	0.45	2.0 ± 7.9	13	4.1 ± 5.6	26	0.20	3.3 ± 5.8	35	—	0	—	3.7 ± 6.2	20	2.7 ± 5.1	19	0.63
From postoperative month 1 to final follow-up^†	7.3 ± 7.7	30	5.8 ± 9.3	5	0.63	7.5 ± 7.2	13	7.8 ± 10.2	26	0.97	7.2 ± 8.6	35	—	0	—	8.6 ± 8.9	20	7.1 ± 10.1	19	0.57
From postoperative month 6 to final follow-up^‡	3.6 ± 9.6	31	1.8 ± 4.3	4	0.67	4.8 ± 8.7	15	3.9 ± 11.6	24	0.86	4.9 ± 9.4	37	—	0	—	4.3 ± 7.8	24	5.3 ± 11.9	15	0.68

Patients were divided into 2 subgroups according to (1) Fusion (tested with Worth 4 dots): Present (4 dots) vs Absent (2 or 3 dots) and (2) Stereoacuity: High-grade (≤ 60 arcsec) vs moderate-low-grade (> 60 arcsec). ^∗Data are presented as mean ± sd; A positive value means a drift towards exodeviation. ‡Patients were divided into subgroups based on binocular function measured at 1 month postoperatively. ‡Patients were divided into subgroups based on binocular function measured at 6 months postoperatively. §two-side Wilcoxon rank-sum test, α = 0.05.