A 24-year-old woman came to the emergency room with a history of diffuse abdominal pain in the form of colic, nausea, vomiting and intestinal constipation. Clinical and ultrasound findings suggested intestinal obstruction due to foreign body. She had been submitted to a cesarean section 4 months previously at another hospital. At laparotomy, a ileum loop was found to be distended by an inside large and hardened mass with another intestinal loops and omentum density adherent. An ileotomy was performed on the compromised segment with terminating anastomosis. When opened surgical specimen it was observed an intraluminal surgical sponge that had completely migrated into the interior of the ileum and stopped next to ileumcecal valve. No fistulas or open intestinal wall were observed.

No abstract

Purpose To determine the effectiveness of office‐based vergence/accommodative therapy for improving accommodative amplitude and accommodative facility in children with symptomatic convergence insufficiency and accommodative dysfunction. Methods We report changes in accommodative function following therapy among participants in the Convergence Insufficiency Treatment Trial – Attention and Reading Trial with decreased accommodative amplitude (115 participants in vergence/accommodative therapy; 65 in placebo therapy) or decreased accommodative facility (71 participants in vergence/accommodative therapy; 37 in placebo therapy) at baseline. The primary analysis compared mean change in amplitude and facility between the vergence/accommodative and placebo therapy groups using analyses of variance models after 4, 8, 12 and 16 weeks of treatment. The proportions of participants with normal amplitude and facility at each time point were calculated. The average rate of change in amplitude and facility from baseline to week 4, and from weeks 4 to 16, were determined in the vergence/accommodative therapy group. Results From baseline to 16 weeks, the mean improvement in amplitude was 8.6 dioptres (D) and 5.2 D in the vergence/accommodative and placebo therapy groups, respectively (mean difference = 3.5 D, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.5 to 5.5 D; p = 0.01). The mean improvement in facility was 13.5 cycles per minute (cpm) and 7.6 cpm in the vergence/accommodative and placebo therapy groups, respectively (mean difference = 5.8 cpm, 95% CI: 3.8 to 7.9 cpm; p < 0.0001). Significantly greater proportions of participants treated with vergence/accommodative therapy achieved a normal amplitude (69% vs. 32%, difference = 37%, 95% CI: 22 to 51%; p < 0.0001) and facility (85% vs. 49%, difference = 36%, 95% CI: 18 to 55%; p < 0.0001) than those who received placebo therapy. In the vergence/accommodative therapy group, amplitude increased at an average rate of 1.5 D per week during the first 4 weeks (p < 0.0001), then slowed to 0.2 D per week (p = 0.002) from weeks 4 to 16. Similarly, facility increased at an average rate of 1.5 cpm per week during the first 4 weeks (p < 0.0001), then slowed to 0.6 cpm per week from weeks 4 to 16 (p < 0.0001). Conclusion Office‐based vergence/accommodative therapy is effective for improving accommodative function in children with symptomatic convergence insufficiency and coexisting accommodative dysfunction.

No abstract

Purpose To determine whether coexisting accommodative dysfunction in children with symptomatic convergence insufficiency (CI) impacts presenting clinical convergence measures, symptoms and treatment success for CI. Methods Secondary data analyses of monocular accommodative amplitude (AA; push‐up method), monocular accommodative facility (AF; ±2.00 D lens flippers) and symptoms (CI Symptom Survey [CISS]) in children with symptomatic CI from the Convergence Insufficiency Treatment Trial (N = 218) and CITT‐Attention and Reading Trial (N = 302) were conducted. Decreased AA was defined as more than 2D below the minimum expected amplitude for age (15 – ¼ age); those with AA < 5 D were excluded. Decreased AF was defined as <6 cycles per minute. Mean near point of convergence (NPC), near positive fusional vergence (PFV) and symptoms (CISS) were compared between those with and without accommodative dysfunction using analysis of variance and independent samples t‐testing. Logistic regression was used to compare the effect of baseline accommodative function on treatment success [defined using a composite of improvements in: (1) clinical convergence measures and symptoms (NPC, PFV and CISS scores) or (2) solely convergence measures (NPC and PFV)]. Results Accommodative dysfunction was common in children with symptomatic CI (55% had decreased AA; 34% had decreased AF). NPC was significantly worse in those with decreased AA (mean difference = 6.1 cm; p < 0.001). Mean baseline CISS scores were slightly worse in children with coexisting accommodative dysfunction (decreased AA or AF) (30.2 points) than those with normal accommodation (26.9 points) (mean difference = 3.3 points; p < 0.001). Neither baseline accommodative function (p ≥ 0.12 for all) nor interaction of baseline accommodative function and treatment (p ≥ 0.50) were related to treatment success based on the two composite outcomes. Conclusions A coexisting accommodative dysfunction in children with symptomatic CI is associated with worse NPC, but it does not impact the severity of symptoms in a clinically meaningful way. Concurrent accommodative dysfunction does not impact treatment response for CI.