ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2017
Bimedial rectus muscle elongation versus bimedial rectus muscle recession for the surgical treatment of large-angle infantile esotropia.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Interventions for infantile esotropia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- 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
- 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare bimedial rectus muscle recession (BMRR; 7-8 mm) and bimedial rectus muscle elongation (BMRE; 6.5-9 mm) for the surgical treatment of large-angle infantile esotropia (ET; ≥70 prism diopters [PD]). PATIENTS AND
methodsTwenty-four patients with large-angle infantile ET were divided into 2 groups; group A (n=12) underwent BMRR and group B (n=12) underwent BMRE. All patients received surgery under general anesthesia and were followed for at least 24 months after surgery. The mean dose-response effect at 24 months was calculated for each patient.
resultsThe mean preoperative angle of deviation was 79.16±7.64 PD (range, 70-90) in group A and 85.83±9.25 PD (range, 70-100) in group B. The duration of surgery was 55% shorter in group A compared with group B. There were no cases of over-correction, but there were 6 cases of under-correction in group A (50%) and 2 cases of under-correction in group B (16.7%). The mean dose-response effect was 4.42±0.19 PD/mm in group A and 5.45±0.39 PD/mm in group B.
conclusionBMRE is more effective than BMRR for the surgical treatment of large-angle infantile ET despite a higher level of technical difficulty.
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.