Stereopsis after successful surgery for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment

  • Hiroki WatanabeEmail author
  • Fumiki Okamoto
  • Yoshimi Sugiura
  • Sujin Hoshi
  • Yoshifumi Okamoto
  • Takahiro Hiraoka
  • Tetsuro Oshika
Retinal Disorders



To evaluate stereopsis after successful surgery for unilateral rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RD), and to investigate the relationship between stereopsis and clinical factors.


In 75 patients after RD surgery and 28 age-matched normal subjects, stereopsis was measured using the Titmus Stereo Test (TST) and TNO stereotest. Clinical data were collected, including age, gender, circumferential dimension of retinal tears, area and duration of RD, macular status, surgical procedures, postoperative spherical equivalent, and logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution best-corrected visual acuity (logMAR BCVA), low-contrast visual acuity, postoperative lens status (phakia/pseudophakia), and presence of postoperative epiretinal membrane (ERM), to determine the factors related to stereopsis.


Stereopsis in patients after surgery was significantly worse than normal subjects (p < 0.0001). Stereopsis in TST was significantly correlated with the area of RD (p < 0.005), difference of postoperative spherical equivalent between two eyes (p < 0.05), postoperative logMAR BCVA (p < 0.005), difference of postoperative logMAR BCVA between two eyes (p < 0.01), and low-contrast visual acuity (p < 0.05). Stereopsis in TNO stereotest showed significant association with postoperative logMAR BCVA (p < 0.05). Stereopsis in both stereotests were significantly worse in patients with macula-off RD than macula-on RD (p < 0.005, p < 0.01 respectively). No significant relationship was found between stereopsis and other factors. Multiple regression analysis revealed that macular status (on/off) had a significant correlation with both stereopsis in TST and TNO stereotest (p = 0.028, p = 0.019 respectively), whereas other clinical parameters were not relevant.


Stereopsis is significantly deteriorated in patients after RD surgery than in normal subjects. Stereopsis was associated with the difference in refraction between two eyes, postoperative visual acuity and contrast sensitivity, and preoperative macular status.


Stereopsis Vitrectomy Rhegmatogenous retinal detachment 


Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

The authors have no individual or family investments, stock or business ownership exceeding 1 % of a company’s worth, consulting, retainers, patents, or other commercial interests in the product or company described in the current article. There is no involvement in the marketing of any product, drug, instrument, or piece of equipment discussed in the manuscript that could cause or be perceived to be a conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Wheatstone C (1838) Contributions to the physiology of vision. Part the first. On some remarkable and hitherto unobserved phenomena of binocular vision. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 371:128Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Escoffery RF, Olk RJ, Grand MG, Boniuk L (1985) Vitrectomy without scleral buckling for primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Am J Ophthalmol 99:275–281PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gatry DS, Chignell AH, Franks WA, Wong D (1993) Pars plana vitrectomy for the treatment of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment uncomplicated by advanced proliferative vitreoretinopathy. Br J Ophthalmol 77:199–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    American Academy of Ophthalmology (1996) The repair of rhegmatogenous retinal detachments. Ophthalmology 103:1313–1324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Heimann H, Bornfeld N, Friedrichs W, Helbig H, Kellner U, Korra A, Foerster MH (1996) Primary vitrectomy without scleral buckling for rhegmetogenous retinal detachment. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 234:561–568PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ross WH, Kozy DW (1998) Visual recovery in macula-off rhegmatogenous retinal detachments. Ophthalmology 105:2149–2153PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Oshima Y, Yamanishi S, Sawa M, Motokura M, Harino S, Emi K (2000) Two-year follow-up study comparing primary vitrectomy with scleral buckling for macula-off rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Jpn J Ophthalmol 44:538–549PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ross W, Lavina A, Russell M, Maberley D (2005) The correlation between height of macular detachment and visual outcome in macula-off retinal detachments of < or = 7 days’ duration. Ophthalmology 112:1213–1217PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brazitikos PD, Androudi S, Christen WG, Stangos NT (2005) Primary pars plana vitrectomy versus scleral buckle surgery for the treatment of pseudophakic retinal detachment: a randomized clinical trial. Retina 25:957–964PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Heimann H, Bartz-Schmidt KU, Bornfeld N, Weiss C, Hilgers RD, Foerster MH (2007) Scleral buckling versus primary vitrectomy in rhegmatogenous retinal detachment: a prospective randomized multicenter clinical study. Ophthalmology 114:2142–2154PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Amemiya T, Takami H, Yoshida H, Harayama K (1982) Binocular visual function after surgery for detached retina. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 218:304–306PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hikichi T, Onodera A, Ishiko S, Fujio N, Mori F, Yoshida A (2001) Stereo acuity in patients with unilateral macular hole and after unilateral macular hole surgery. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 239:128–132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mireskandari K, Garnham L, Sheard R, Ezra E, Gregor ZJ, Sloper JJ (2004) A prospective study of the effect of a unilateral macular hole on sensory and motor binocular function and recovery following successful surgery. Br J Ophthalmol 88:1320–1324PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Asaria R, Garnham L, Gregor ZJ, Sloper JJ (2008) A prospective study of binocular visual function before and after successful surgery to remove a unilateral epiretinal membrane. Ophthalmology 115:1930–1937PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wright LA, Cleary M, Barrie T, Hammer HM (1999) Motility and binocularity outcomes in vitrectomy versus scleral buckling in retinal detachment surgery. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 237:1028–1032PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shiragami C, Shiraga F, Yamaji H, Fukuda K, Takagishi M, Morita M, Kishikami T (2010) Unintentional displacement of the retina after standard vitrectomy for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Ophthalmology 117:86–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Levy NS, Glick EB (1974) Stereoscopic perception and Snellen visual acuity. Am J Ophthalmol 78:722–724PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Donzis PB, Rappazzo JA, Burde RM, Gordon M (1983) Effect of binocular variations of Snellen’s visual acuity on Titmus stereoacuity. Arch Ophthalmol 101:930–932PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Goodwin RT, Romano PE (1985) Stereoacuity degradation by experimental and real monocular and binocular amblyopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 26:917–923PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lam AK, Chau AS, Lam WY, Leung GY, Man BS (1996) Effect of naturally occurring visual acuity differences between two eyes in stereoacuity. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 16:189–195PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Burian HM (1951) Anomalous retinal correspondence. Its essence and its significance in diagnosis and treatment. Am J Ophthalmol 34:237–253PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Weakley DR Jr (2001) The association between nonstrabismic anisometropia, amblyopia, and subnormal binocularity. Ophthalmology 108:163–171PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lubkin V, Kramer P, Meininger D, Shippman S, Bennett G, Visintainer P (1999) Aniseikonia in relation to strabismus, anisometropia and amblyopia. Binocul Vis Strabismus Q 14:203–207PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Seaber JH, Buckley EG (1995) Strabismus after retinal detachment surgery: etiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Semin Ophthalmol 10:61–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Weinman J, Cooke V (1982) Eye dominance and stereopsis. Perception 11:207–210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Erickson P, McGill EC (1992) Role of visual acuity, stereoacuity, and ocular dominance in monovision patient success. Optom Vis Sci 69:761–764PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pierce DM (1975) Comparability of two methods of estimating real-depth acuity. Ophthalmologica 171:224–235PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lovasik JV, Szymkiw M (1985) Effects of aniseikonia, anisometropia, accommodation, retinal illuminance, and pupil size on stereopsis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 26:741–750PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kani W (1978) Stereopsis and spatial perception in amblyopes and uncorrected ametropes. Br J Ophthalmol 62:756–762PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chang SD, Kim IT (2000) Long-term visual recovery after scleral buckling procedure of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment involving the macula. Korean J Ophthalmol 14:20–26PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hiroki Watanabe
    • 1
    Email author
  • Fumiki Okamoto
    • 1
  • Yoshimi Sugiura
    • 1
  • Sujin Hoshi
    • 1
  • Yoshifumi Okamoto
    • 1
  • Takahiro Hiraoka
    • 1
  • Tetsuro Oshika
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of MedicineUniversity of TsukubaTsukubaJapan

Personalised recommendations