PURPOSE: To evaluate the anterior segment biometric parameters of non-accommodative and accommodative refractive accommodative esotropia (RAE). METHODS: Eighty-one eyes of 81 patients were included in this prospective, case-control study. The patients were divided into three groups as follows: the RAE group (n = 31), the hypermetropia group (n = 25), and the emmetropia group (n = 25). Measurements were obtained in the non-accommodative (0.0 diopters) and accommodative status (-5.0 diopters) using a Pentacam HR. The anterior chamber depth (ACD), anterior chamber volume (ACV), pupil diameter (PD), and anterior chamber angle (ACA) were evaluated at all four quadrants. RESULTS: The ACD, ACV and PD values in the RAE group were lower than those of the other groups in both states (p < 0.05). The ACD values were lower in the hypermetropia group than in the emmetropia group for the non-accommodative status (p = 0.024) but were similar for the accommodative status (p = 0.225). PD and ACV values were lower in the hypermetropia group than in the emmetropia group in both states (non-accommodative status, p = 0.011 and p = 0.022; accommodative status, p = 0.026 and p = 0.034, respectively). Changes in ACD, ACV and PD during accommodation (Δ) were not significant in the RAE group but were significant for the other groups (hypermetropia: ΔACD, p = 0.001; ΔACV, p = 0.001; ΔPD, p = 0.002; emmetropia: ΔACD, p < 0.001; ΔACV, p = 0.001; ΔPD, p < 0.001). These changes were significantly lower in the hypermetropia group than in the emmetropia group (ΔACD, p = 0.012; ΔACV, p = 0.031; ΔPD, p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: The anterior chamber in RAE patients was shallower and the increase in convexity of the anterior surface or forward movement of the crystalline lens was more limited during accommodation in RAE.
Anterior Chamber ; Case-Control Studies ; Emmetropia ; Esotropia ; Humans ; Hyperopia ; Lens, Crystalline ; Prospective Studies ; Pupil

Background: Open inguinal hernia repair (OIHR) surgery is a common surgical procedure, and ultrasound guided interfascial plane blocks can also be included in current approaches to postoperative multimodal analgesia regimens. This study aimed to compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy of the erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and transversalis fascia plane block (TFPB) in patients undergoing OIHR. Methods: This prospective, randomized, assessor-blinded comparative study was conducted in the postoperative recovery room and ward of a tertiary hospital. A total of 80 patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I–III were enrolled and allocated equally to either the ESPB or TFPB group. The patients received standard multimodal analgesia in addition to an ultrasound-guided ESPB or TFPB. During the first 24 h postoperatively, tramadol consumption was assessed and pain levels at rest and during movement were compared using numeric rating scale (NRS) scores at 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 h postoperatively. Results: The results showed no difference in NRS scores at any time point between the groups, except for NRS at rest in the third hour. However, tramadol consumption was lower in the TFPB group than in the ESPB group overall (88 ± 75.2 vs. 131 ± 93.7 mg, respectively; P = 0.027, mean difference: −43, 95% CI [−80.82, −5.18]). Conclusions The TFPB leads to lower tramadol requirements in the first 24 h postoperatively than the ESPB in patients undergoing OIHR.