Skip to main content
. 2020 Jul 21;2020:7392165. doi: 10.1155/2020/7392165

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.