Pre- and postoperative quantitative analysis of contour abnormalities in Graves upper eyelid retraction.

Purpose: One of the most common problems of the surgical management of Graves upper eyelid retraction is the occurrence of eyelid contour abnormalities. In the present study, the postoperative contour of a large sample of eyelids of patients with Graves orbitopathy was measured. Methods: The postoperative upper eyelid contour of 62 eyes of 43 patients with Graves orbitopathy was subjectively classified by 3 experienced surgeons in 3 categories: poor, fair, and good. The shape of the eyelid contours in each category was then measured with a recently developed custom-made software by measuring multiple midpupil eyelid distances each 15 degrees along the palpebral fissure. The upper eyelid contour of 60 normal subjects was also quantified as a control group. Results: The mean ratio between the sum of the lateral and medial midpupil eyelid distances (lateral/medial ratio) was 1.10 +/- 0.11 standard deviation in controls and 1.15 +/- 0.13 standard deviation in patients. Postoperatively, the mean midpupil eyelid distance at 90 degrees was 4.16 +/- 1.13 mm standard deviation. The distribution lateral/medial ratios of the eyelids judged as having good contours was similar to the distribution of the controls with a modal value centered on the interval between 1.0 and 1.10. The distribution of lateral/medial ratios of the eyelids judged as having poor contour was bimodal, with eyelids with low and high lateral/medial ratios. Low lateral/medial ratios occurred when there was a lateral overcorrection, giving the eyelid a flat or a medial ptosis appearance. High lateral/medial ratios were due to a central or medial overcorrection or a lateral peak maintenance. Conclusions: Postoperative upper eyelid contour abnormalities can be quantified by comparing the sum of multiple midpupil eyelid distances of the lateral and medial sectors of the eyelid. Low and high lateral/medial ratios are anomalous and judged as unpleasant. (Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 2012;28:429-433)