MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208786214 · doi:10.1002/ana.26261

Fixating with the Paretic Eye: Evidence of “Fixation Duress” on <scp>PET</scp> Imaging

2021· article· en· W3208786214 on OpenAlexaff
Cathy Meng Fei Li, Jonathan Romsa, Adrian Budhram, J. Alexander Fraser

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Neurology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoidosis and Beryllium Toxicity Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingPositron emission tomographyDiplopiaNuclear medicineRadiologyOphthalmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 71-year-old man presented with a one-month history of binocular vertical diplopia. On examination, visual acuity was 20/25 OD and 20/20 OS. He had an 8-diopter right hypotropia in primary gaze that worsened with right gaze and with left head tilt, in keeping with a left superior oblique (SO) palsy. Cover testing demonstrated an upward refixation movement of the right eye, indicating preferential fixation with his paretic left eye. Contemporaneous eye movement photographs were not obtained; however, his binocular misalignments in the cardinal positions of gaze and with head tilts are recreated schematically in Panel A. The remainder of his physical examination was unremarkable. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) head with gadolinium disclosed a homogenously-enhancing left trochlear nerve lesion in the ambient cistern (Panel B, arrow) and multifocal T2 FLAIR hyperintensities in both cerebral hemispheres. The orbits and extraocular muscles were normal.[Color figure can be viewed at www.annalsofneurology.org] An 18-F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) PET (positron emission tomography)/CT (computerized tomography) was ordered to rule out sarcoidosis and histiocytic disorders, such as Erdheim-Chester disease. The PET/CT did not show hypermetabolism of the intracranial lesions or 18F-FDG avidity in regions typically affected by sarcoidosis and histiocytic disorders. The PET study did, however, demonstrate focally increased 18F-FDG avidity within the structurally-normal IR muscle of the paretic left eye. The PET was fused with MRI to better delineate the increased 18F-FDG uptake within the left IR (Panel C, arrow). Quantitatively, the total lesion glycolysis (TLG) was threefold higher in the left IR (1.7 SUVbw × ml) (standardized uptake value [SUV], body weight [bw]) than in the right IR (0.5 SUVbw × ml). The TLG asymmetry confirmed that the left IR was more metabolically active in fixation duress. Eventually, an intracranial biopsy was performed and diagnosed central nervous system light-chain amyloidosis. In most cases of SO palsy, the unopposed elevating action of the inferior oblique (IO) muscle produces hypertropia in the affected eye. However, up to 18% of patients with unilateral SO palsy prefer to fixate with their paretic eye.1 This preference can occur, for example, when the paretic eye has better visual acuity. In this substantial minority of SO palsy patients, fixation with the paretic eye requires continuous activation of the eye's sole remaining depressor, the inferior rectus (IR) muscle – a phenomenon called “fixation duress.”2 Innervation to the ipsilateral elevator muscles diminishes accordingly, which results in decreased innervation to the contralateral elevator muscles as dictated by Hering's law of equal innervation. Therefore, the combination of reduced innervation to the elevator muscles and intact innervation to both depressor muscles causes the healthy contralateral eye to develop a secondary hypotropia when the paretic eye is in fixation duress.2 A common clinical mistake in the examination of diplopia is to assume that the deviated eye must always be the paretic one. This is simply not true. Secondary deviations of the healthy eye may occur as a natural consequence of the fixation duress, a physiologically active process as exemplified by our patient's PET/CT. Furthermore, diplopia localization techniques that rely on determining which eye sees a “true” (macular) image and which a “false” (peripheral) image are likewise unreliable, as the paretic eye may be fixating. Instead, clinicians examining a patient with diplopia should opt for techniques of alternate cover testing or Maddox rod testing,3 which do not depend on which eye is used to fixate and thus remain reliable for localization. To our knowledge, this is the first report with PET data that demonstrates and quantifies the metabolic changes in extraocular eye muscles during fixation duress. The increased 18F-FDG avidity within the left IR indicates glucose hypermetabolism as a physiologic response to its continuous activation when maintaining fixation in SO palsy.4 Using validated diplopia examination techniques, clinicians can accurately localize the paretic extraocular muscle, and avoid being misled by fixation duress and secondary deviations in patients fixating with their paretic eye. No funding or sponsorship was received in connection with this manuscript. C.L., A.B., and A.F. contributed to study concept and design. C.L., J.R., and A.F. contributed to data acquisition and analysis. C.L, J.R., A.B., and A.F. contributed to drafting manuscript or preparing figures. Nothing to report.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of NeurologySame topicSarcoidosis and Beryllium Toxicity ResearchFrench-language works237,207