Abstract

In a recent article on ocular terminology, Lancaster, speaking for the American Committee on Optics and Visual Physiology, presented definitions* of anomalous retinal correspondence and related phenomena. One definition described an anomalous retinal correspondence as a condition in which the fovea of one retina and an eccentric element of the other acquired a common visual direction; that is, became corresponding retinal points. A review of the literature reveals this simple definition to be in common usage. Unfortunately, such a functional relationship between the fovea of the fixating eye and a peripheral retinal area in the squinting eye can be demonstrated in few patients with anomalous retinal correspondence. Moreover, attempts to use the definition as a criterion for diagnosis have misled some ophthalmologists to believe the anomaly rare. This fact is exemplified by a comparison of 100 cases of esotropia selected at random from admissions to the State University of Iowa Clinics in 1935 with 100 consecutive cases admitted in 1942. Of the 1935 group, only three were suspected of having some anomaly of correspondence, whereas a definite diagnosis of anomalous retinal correspondence was made in 73 percent of the 1942 group. New criteria for diagnosis and improved methods of examination account for the discrepancy rather than does an increased incidence of the anomaly. In 1935, the orthoptist used an illuminated Brewster-Holmes type of prism stereoscope so adjusted that when one target was fixated by the fovea of the nonsquinting eye, the other target stimulated that peripheral retinal area of the squinting eye which, according to the aforementioned definition, could become a functionally corresponding point. Correspondence was considered abnormal only if the two objects

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call