Survey of ptosis practice patterns among surgeons in Asia Pacific Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (APSOPRS)

ABSTRACT

Objective

To characterize the preferred ptosis practice patterns and variations among oculoplastic surgeons in the Asia-Pacific region.

Methods

A web-based questionnaire was sent to both members and non-members registered under the Asia Pacific Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (APSOPRS)’s email database. The survey included preoperative testing practices, surgical preferences for adult aponeurotic and congenital ptosis, various surgical techniques (anterior and posterior approach ptosis procedures, and frontalis sling procedures) and postoperative practices.

Results

A total of 386 survey invitations were sent. There was a response rate of 68.7% from respondents from 20 countries in the Asia-Pacific region. There was variation in the preoperative evaluation and management of ptosis. Anterior approach ptosis surgery (96.6%) and frontalis sling procedures (86.8%) were performed by more surgeons than posterior approach ptosis surgery (47.2%). There was a deviation from the traditional frontalis sling procedures for patients with poor levator function.

Conclusions

Our survey results provide insight into the variation in the assessment and management of ptosis amongst oculoplastic surgeons in the Asia-Pacific region. It also demonstrates some differences between practice patterns in Asia-Pacific and America.

KEYWORDS:

• blepharoptosis surgery
• frontalis sling
• levator advancement
• Ptosis
• conjunctivomullerectomy

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest in relation to the work described.

Author contribution statement

All authors have made substantial contributions to the 1) conception of the work, 2) the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data, 3) drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content and 4) final approval of the version published.

All authors agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. The manuscript has been read and approved by all the authors, and the requirements for authorship as stated above have been met.

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.