Surgical intervention for paediatric blepharoptosis: a 6-year case series
- 91 Downloads
To present our experience of paediatric blepharoptosis in a tertiary referral centre and evaluate the effectiveness of surgical intervention.
A retrospective cohort study of all children receiving surgical blepharoptosis correction between 1/1/10 and 29/2/16. Children with pre-operative levator function (LF) ≥ 7 mm received levator resection, those with LF ≤ 4 mm received brow suspension, and in those children with LF of 5–6 mm, either levator resection or brow suspension was chosen depending on the degree of frontalis recruitment.
Ninety-five children (109 eyes, 64 boys) underwent blepharoptosis surgery within the study period. Mean (range) age at surgery was 5.9 (1.2–12.5) years. Seventy-nine (83.2%) had simple levator maldevelopment. Fifteen children were excluded due to inadequate follow-up. Of the remaining 80 children, 41 (51.2%) underwent levator resection, 27 (33.8%) underwent fascia lata brow suspension, and twelve (15.0%) underwent mersilene mesh brow suspension. Margin reflex distance-1 was greatest at 6-week follow-up with a small “lid drop” by 6-month follow-up in both the levator resection (0.9 mm pre-operatively, 3.1 mm at 6-week follow-up, 2.6 mm at 6-month follow-up) and fascia lata brow suspension (0.3 mm, 2.5 mm, 2.2 mm) groups. No immediate complications, and only two serious post-operative complications, were noted. One case of residual blepharoptosis was re-operated (fascia lata brow suspension).
Surgical correction of paediatric blepharoptosis is safe and, after an observed lid drop between 6-week and 6-month follow-up (not seen in the mersilene mesh brow suspension group), effect appears to be maintained to 6 months and beyond. Readily accessible orthoptic assessment would help identify children at risk of amblyopia, both pre-operatively and post-operatively.
KeywordsPaediatric Blepharoptosis Ptosis Levator resection Brow suspension
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
For this type of study, formal consent is not required.
- 2.Beneish R, Williams F, Polomeno RC et al (1983) Unilateral congenital ptosis and amblyopia. Can J Ophthalmol 18:127–130Google Scholar
- 8.Pavone P, Mackey DA, Parano E et al (2010) Blepharoptosis in children: our experience at the light of literature. Clin Ter 161(3):241–243Google Scholar
- 11.Fox SA (1966) Congenital ptosis II. Frontalis sling. J Pediatr Ophthalmol 3:25–28Google Scholar
- 12.Crawford JS (1956) Repair of ptosis using frontalis muscle and fascia lata. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otololaryngol 60:672–678Google Scholar
- 13.Holladay JT (1997) Proper method for calculating average visual acuity. J Cataract Refract Surg 13:388–391Google Scholar
- 14.Collin JRO (1989) A manual of systemic eyelid surgery, 2nd edn. Churchill Livingstone, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
- 18.Iljin A, Loba A, Omulecki W et al (2003) Congenital blepharoptosis: part I. Evaluation of the results of surgical treatment for congenital blepharoptosis. Acta Chir Plast 45:8–12Google Scholar