4.1 Article

Involutional Entropion and Ectropion of the Lower Eyelid: Prevalence and Associated Risk Factors in the Elderly Population

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/IOP.0b013e3182115229

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To determine the prevalence of involutional entropion and ectropion of the lower eyelid in the elderly population; to examine how these disorders are related to gender, age, skin color, and axial ocular globe projection; and to define the incidence of associated ocular surface and pathologic eyelid findings. Methods: An ophthalmic survey was conducted in 24,565 elderly people. All participants underwent ophthalmic examination by general ophthalmologists to identify entropion and ectropion. Information about associated ocular surface and pathologic eyelid findings were collected from all patients with involutional eyelid malposition. Patients with involutional entropion and ectropion underwent measurements of the axial ocular globe projection. The Pearson chi-square test and the Mann-Whitney U test were performed. Results: The prevalence of involutional entropion was 2.1%; 1.9% in men and 2.4% in women. The prevalence of involutional ectropion was 2.9%; 5.1% in men and 1.5% in women. Dry eye syndrome, lower retractor laxity, and superficial punctate keratopathy were seen significantly more often in patients with involutional entropion than in those with involutional ectropion (p < 0.001). Chronic conjunctivitis was significantly more common in patients with involutional ectropion than in those with involutional entropion (p < 0.001). The axial ocular globe projection was significantly smaller in patients with involutional entropion than in those with involutional ectropion (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The prevalence of involutional entropion and ectropion in the elderly population is 2.1% and 2.9%, respectively. The axial ocular globe position plays a pathogenic role in involutional lower eyelid malposition. (Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 27: 317-320)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据