ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2015
Medial rectus muscle elongation, a technique to treat very large-angle esotropia.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bilateral medial rectus recession with or without posterior fixation in large-angle infantile esotropia: a randomized controlled trial.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2024Trial
- Three horizontal muscle surgery for large-angle esotropia: success rate and dose-effect ratio.International journal of ophthalmology · 2020Article
- Bimedial rectus muscle elongation versus bimedial rectus muscle recession for the surgical treatment of large-angle infantile esotropia.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2017Article
- Supramaximal Recession and Resection Surgery in Large-Angle Strabismus: Outcomes of Large Interventional Case Series Exotropia and Esotropia.Journal of current ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose was to describe the medial rectus muscle elongation (MRE) procedure to treat very large-angle esotropia (ET) with surgery on a lower number of muscles.
methodsTwenty patients with very large-angle ET (more than 70 PD) underwent the MRE procedure. In the MRE procedure, the muscle was split longitudinally into three parts. The wider central part was sutured with 6/0 vicryl and disinserted. The distal end of the peripheral parts (still attached to the original insertion), 7-9 mm away from the insertion, was sutured to the proximal end of the central part. At the end of the procedure, the distance of the anastomosis site from the insertion was named as the final elongation. The dose-response effect of the final elongation was calculated in bilateral MRE cases. The mean of the dose-response effect, obtained in the binocular surgery group, was used in the monocular surgery group to calculate the resection effect of lateral rectus (LR) muscle.
resultsEleven patients underwent bilateral MRE and nine patients underwent unilateral MRE and LR muscle resection. The mean preoperative far and near deviation was 94.10 ± 19.33 PD. The mean postoperative deviation was 14.60 ± 18.07 PD for far and 14.50 ± 18.23 PD for near deviation. In bilateral MRE cases, the mean dose-response effect of the elongation was 5.53 ± 0.67 PD/mm for far and 5.58 ± 0.69 PD/mm for near deviation. The mean LR muscle resection effect was 6.41 ± 1.99 PD/mm for far and 6.28 ± 1.93 PD/mm for near deviation.
conclusionThe MRE procedure seems an acceptable method to treat very large-angle ET with surgery on a lower number of muscles.
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.