ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2014
Long-term postoperative outcomes of bilateral lateral rectus recession vs unilateral recession-resection for intermittent exotropia.
Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk Factors of Residual Exotropia After Surgery in Patients with Intermittent and Sensory Exotropia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- Impact of Online Video Game-Based Dichoptic Training on Binocular Vision Rehabilitation in Post-surgical Patients with Intermittent Exotropia.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2024Article
- The Effects of Orthoptic Therapy on the Surgical Outcome in Children with Intermittent Exotropia: Randomised Controlled Clinical Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- How to Better Treat Patients with Intermittent Exotropia: A Review of Surgical Treatment of Intermittent Exotropia.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2022Review
- Surgical management of intermittent exotropia: do we have an answer for all?BMJ open ophthalmology · 2019Review
- Article
- Comparison of bilateral/unilateral lateral rectus recession and unilateral recession-resection for intermittent exotropia: a Meta-analysis.International journal of ophthalmology · 2018Article
- Comparison of Long-term Surgical Outcomes of Two-muscle Surgery in Basic-type Intermittent Exotropia: Bilateral versus Unilateral.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2017Article
- Long-term outcomes of augmented unilateral recess-resect procedure in children with intermittent exotropia.PloS one · 2017Article
- The Stabilization of Postoperative Exo-drift in Intermittent Exotropia after Surgical Treatment.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2016Article
- Clinical Characteristics and Surgical Outcomes in Patients With Intermittent Exotropia: A Large Sample Study in South China.Medicine · 2016Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo discuss the long-term postoperative results of bilateral lateral rectus recession (BLR) and unilateral lateral rectus recession-medial rectus resection (RR) in therapy of intermittent exotropia.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 213 cases of intermittent exotropia who underwent surgery between 2008 and 2010. The patients were grouped into BLR group and RR group. Motor outcomes were divided into three groups on the basis of the angle of deviation after surgery: overcorrection (esotropia/phoria >5(Δ)), orthophoria (esotropia/phoria ≤5(Δ) to exotropia/phoria ≤10(Δ)), and undercorrection/recurrence (exotropia/phoria >10(Δ)). Titmus test was used to evaluate stereoacuity, the stereoacuity <800s of arc meaned the patients had stereopsis. Surgical outcome including motor criteria and sensory status were compared at postoperative 6, 12, 24mo and at 36mo examination between groups.
resultsAt 12, 24mo after surgery, the motor outcomes had no difference (P>0.05) between groups. However, the motor outcomes at 6, 36mo were signally different in each group, indicating the success rate in RR group at 6mo was higher than that in BLR group (83.02% vs 82.24%, P<0.05) but the result was contrary at the 3y examination (60.75% vs 43.40%, P<0.05). No statistical significance were found in the sensory outcomes between the groups at mean of 3.7y follow-up.
conclusionThe motor outcomes in RR group were better than in BLR group at 6mo after surgery, while the 3y outcomes were better in BLR group. This may be due to the recurrence rate of the BLR was lower than the RR group's.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.