Simultaneous Versus Staged Balanced Decompression for Thyroid-Related Compressive Optic Neuropathy

Purpose: To compare the visual and exophthalmometry outcomes of simultaneous versus staged balanced decompression in patients with thyroid-related compressive optic neuropathy (CON).

Methods: All consecutive patients who underwent simultaneous or staged balanced decompressions for clinically diagnosed thyroid-related CON performed by 4 surgeons at the Kellogg Eye Center of the University of Michigan between 1999 and 2014 were included in the study. Demographic, medical, and surgical covariates were collected. Orbits were stratified by decompression technique. Primary outcomes were improvement in CON score (which quantifies visual dysfunction using logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution, color vision, and Humphrey visual field mean deviation), and improvement in proptosis. The authors performed univariate and descriptive statistics to identify baseline differences and covariates associated with the outcomes of interest; multivariate mixed linear regression models (to adjust for interorbit correlation) were then constructed with inclusion of potential confounders with p value ≤0.1.

Results: In total, 80 orbits of 53 patients were included in the study. Of the 80 orbits, 61% underwent simultaneous balanced decompression, and 39% underwent staged balanced decompression. Mean CON score reduction was 6.12 ± 9.7 and mean proptosis reduction was 5.63 ± 2.6 mm. Staged balanced decompression was significantly associated with greater CON score reduction (p = 0.038). However, staged (vs. simultaneous) decompression technique did not remain an independent predictor (p = 0.950) after multivariate analysis adjusted for confounders. For proptosis reduction, there were no statistically significant differences between simultaneous and staged balanced decompression on univariate (p = 0.122) or multivariate mixed linear regression models (p = 0.812).

Conclusion: Simultaneous and staged balanced decompression are equally efficacious in treating visual dysfunction and exophthalmos due to thyroid eye disease in patients with clinically diagnosed CON. Patient choice should be the primary consideration and care should be individualized. Further studies validating the CON score used in the study and comparative studies individualizing surgical treatment of thyroid eye disease are warranted.