摘要目的:分析病因不典型急性获得性共同性内斜视（AACE）的临床特点、可能病因及手术疗效。方法:病例对照研究。收集2019年1至12月在天津市眼科医院确诊为AACE并行斜视矫正手术治疗的12例患者资料，其中男性7例，女性5例，年龄（28±7）岁，12例患者均伴有复视主诉，发病时长（8.83±3.71）个月，均行眼部常规检查除外弱视及眼部器质性病变，行眼眶及头颅MRI检查除外眼眶及颅脑疾病，并经病史询问否认存在引起AACE的常见诱因（如单眼遮盖、精神或心理因素、中高度近视眼等）。分析此类患者的发病特征、看近（33 cm）与看远（5 m）斜视度数差异以及斜视矫正手术前、后斜视度数和立体视变化。选取同期在天津市眼科医院行单眼斜视矫正手术治疗且性别、年龄匹配的10例间歇性外斜视患者及10例自幼发病、无复视症状的共同性内斜视患者资料作为对照，比较3类患者内直肌肌止点位置。采用配对样本 t检验及单因素方差分析等进行统计学分析。 结果:12例AACE患者睫状肌麻痹后验光的等效球镜度数为（1.70±0.88）D；术前第一眼位看近的内斜视度数为（22.42±5.82）三棱镜度（PD），看远的内斜视度数为（20.00±4.86）PD，二者差异无统计学意义（ P=0.371）；术中行被动牵拉试验，所有患者双眼内直肌无明显紧张或挛缩，外直肌无麻痹情况存在。12例AACE患者内直肌肌止端附着点距角膜缘距离为（5.20±0.27）mm，间歇性外斜视患者为（5.30±0.25）mm，共同性内斜视患者为（5.30±0.31）mm，三者间差异无统计学意义（ P=0.618）。12例AACE患者术后6周、3个月和6个月均残留小度数隐性内斜视（平均3.42~6.33 PD），且术后立体视较术前好转，术前有2例患者无立体视，术后12例患者均有立体视。 结论:病因不典型AACE患者不合并高度近视眼，无远视眼，看远与看近内斜视度数无明显差别，推测其内斜视的产生可能与先天存在的隐性内斜视失代偿有关，从而产生复视的临床症状，常规手术量能够减轻内斜视，恢复立体视，但术后仍残存少量隐性内斜视，此类患者内直肌附着点无异常。 （中华眼科杂志，2021，57：348-352）

abstractsObjective:To investigate the clinical characteristics, possible etiology and surgical efficacy of acute acquired concomitant esotropia (AACE) with atypical etiology.Methods:Case-control study. Twelve patients, including 7 males and 5 females, who complained of diplopia and were diagnosed with AACE in Tianjin Eye Hospital from January to December 2019 and underwent surgical treatment were included. The duration of the disease was (8.83±3.71) months. All patients underwent routine ocular examination except amblyopia and ocular organic lesions. MRI examination of the orbits and the brain was performed in all the patients in order to screen orbital and craniocerebral diseases, and patients denied that the existence of common causes of AACE (such as occlusion of one eye, mental or psychological factors, medium to high myopia, etc. during medical examination). The characteristics of the disease, the difference of deviation angle at 33 cm and 5 m, and the changes of deviation angle and stereopsis before and after surgery were analyzed. The forced duction test was performed before operation, and the distance between the sclera margin and the midpoint of the medial rectus muscle attachment was measured and compared with the patients with intermittent exotropia (10 cases) and comitant esotropia (10 cases). Paired sample t-test and one-way analysis of variance were used for statistical analysis. Results:The mean spherical equivalent was (1.70±0.88) D in all AACE patients, and the deviation angle was (22.42±5.82) prism diopter (PD) at 33 cm and (20.00±4.86) PD at 5 m in primary gaze, which were not statistically significant ( P=0.371). The force duction test showed no obvious tension or contracture of the medial rectus and no paralysis. In patients with AACE, the horizontal distance from the midpoint of the medial rectus to the limbus was (5.20±0.27) mm, versus (5.30±0.25) mm in intermittent exotropia patients and (5.30±0.31) mm in concomitant esotropia patients. All the differences were not statistically significant ( P=0.618). All the patients with AACE had residual esotropia (mean, 3.42 to 6.33 PD) at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively, and their stereopsis improved more than before, with no stereopsis in 2 patients before surgery and stereopsis in all 12 patients after surgery. Conclusions:AACE patients with atypical etiology do not have high myopia and hyperopia. There is no significant difference between the distance and near angles. The occurrence of esotropia is related to decompensation of esophoria, which may result in clinical symptoms of diplopia. Conventional surgery can reduce esotropia and restore stereoscopic vision, but there is still a small amount of esophoria after surgery. There is no abnormality in the attachment point of the medial rectus muscle. (Chin J Ophthalmol, 2021, 57: 348-352)