Measurement of fusional vergence: protocol for a systematic review

Introduction - No validated protocol exists for the measurement of the prism fusion ranges. Many studies report on how fusional vergence ranges can be measured using different techniques (rotary prism, prism bar, loose prisms and synoptophore) and stimuli, leading to different ranges being reported in the literature. Repeatability of the different methods available and the equivalence between them it is also important. In addition, some studies available do not agree in what order fusional vergence should be measured to provide the essential information on which to base clinical judgements on compensation of deviations. When performing fusional vergence testing the most commonly accepted clinical technique is to first measure negative fusional vergence followed by a measurement of positive fusional vergence to avoid affecting the value of vergence recovery because of excessive stimulation of convergence. Von Noorden recommend using vertical fusion amplitudes in between horizontal amplitudes (base-out, base-up, base-in, and base down) to prevent vergence adaptation. Others place the base of the prism in the direction opposite to that used to measure the deviation to increase the vergence demand. Objectives - The purpose of this review is to assess and compare the accuracy of tests for measurement of fusional vergence. Secondary objectives are to investigate sources of heterogeneity of diagnostic accuracy including: age; variation in method of assessment; study design; study size; type of strabismus (convergent, divergent, vertical, cycle); severity of strabismus (constant/intermittent/latent).

Fusional vergence measurements for eso versus exo deviations: is there a difference?

Purpose: The aims of this study were to compare angle of deviation, fusional vergence measurements and fusion reserve ratio between esophoria and exophoria. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed in children with best-corrected visual acuity of 0.0 LogMAR in either eye, compensated heterophoria within 10 prism dioptres (PD), full ocular rotations, presence of fusional vergence and stereopsis (60 seconds of arc or better). Fusional amplitudes were compared between angle of deviation (2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 PD) in esophoria and exophoria. The fusion reserve ratio was calculated (to assess the effect of the underlying angle of deviation) as fusional convergence divided by prism alternating cover test measurements. Results: Two-hundred and eleven children (7.65±1.16 years) were recruited to this study. Exophoria was most common for near (n=181; 85.8%) and distance (n=20; 9.5%). Esophoria was present in 22 children for near (10.4%) and in 1 child for distance (0.5%). No significant differences were found between fusional amplitudes and angle of deviation for near (p>0.05). Children with exophoria of 10PD had a slight, but not, significant (p=0.264) increase in fusional convergence from 2PD (19.95±5.09) to 10PD (26.67±5.77). In esophoric children the variation of fusional convergence was smaller from 2P (25.00±0.00) to 10PD (22.50±3.54) and non significant (p=0.185). The fusion reserve ratio was significantly smaller in children with higher deviations (i.e. 10PD) for both esophoria (p=0.003) and exophoria (p>0.001). The fusion reserve ratio ranged between 12.50 (2PD) and 2.25±0.35 (10PD) for esophoria and between 9.98±2.55 (2PD) and 2.67±0.58 (10PD) for exophoria. Conclusions: Angle of deviation is not an efficient measure to predict fusional amplitudes. The fusion reserve ratio appears to be a better measurement to assess the effect of the underlying angle of deviation on fusional convergence. More studies are necessary to understand better the relationship between fusion amplitudes and angle of deviation.

Type of strabismus and changes to fusion measures

Assessing the range of vergence provides information about the patient’s ability to maintain the binocular vision. Disparity vergence measurements should be used to quantify control of an underlying eye misalignment. In the presence of a manifest deviation the testing is performed by first compensating the angle of deviation to determine prognosis. Type of deviation: a) in an exophoria there is an increase in the fast fusional convergence while in an esophoric deviation there is an increase in reflex fusional divergence to attain binocular single vision; b) convergence fusion amplitudes have been found to correlate with control of the exodeviation; c) there is a greater BO range for esos and greater BI range for exos.