ArticleEye (London, England)2019
Comparison of ocular torsion between congenital and acquired unilateral superior oblique palsy.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does abnormal head posture aid in amblyopia prevention?BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- The consistency and efficacy of optical coherence tomography for the evaluation of ocular torsion angle in children.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- The changes in ocular torsion after unilateral lateral rectus recession-medial rectus resection for intermittent exotropia.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes in patients with superior oblique muscle palsy: a retrospective study on 1057 patients.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the effect of unilateral and bilateral inferior oblique myectomy on fundus torsion in primary and secondary inferior oblique overaction.Northern clinics of Istanbul · 2023Article
- Pattern Strabismus in a Tertiary Hospital in Southern China: A Retrospective Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Spontaneous Recovery of Traumatic Unilateral Superior Oblique Palsy and Ocular Factors for Predicting Prognosis.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2022Article
- Range of forced cyclorotation in superior oblique palsy and V-pattern strabismus.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2021Article
- Congenital ocular counter-roll: a review of cases treated exclusively by ophthalmologists.International journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Comparison of excyclotorsion following graded inferior oblique recession for primary versus secondary inferior oblique overaction.International journal of ophthalmology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesTo compare ocular torsion between congenital and acquired unilateral superior oblique palsy (USOP). SUBJECTS/
methodsRetrospective review was performed on medical records of 163 USOP patients. Qualitative fundus torsional states in both eyes were determined based on locations of optic disc and fovea. Disc-fovea angles (DFA) were collected in both eyes for quantitative analysis. DFAs and the proportions of qualitative fundus torsional states in paretic and non-paretic eyes were compared between USOP patients and normal controls, and between congenital and acquired USOP patients.
resultsThis study included 90 patients with congenital USOP, 73 patients with acquired USOP, and 66 normal controls. Most control subjects showed no torsion in both eyes (93.9%), whereas 61.1% of congenital and 46.5% of acquired USOP patients showed extorsion in either eye. More patients with congenital USOP showed fundus extorsion in the non-paretic eye (24.4% versus 12.3%) or both eyes (20.0% versus 6.8%), compared with patients with acquired USOP (P = 0.007). DFAs of paretic and non-paretic eyes were larger in USOP patients than in normal controls (P < 0.001, for both congenital USOP versus control and acquired USOP versus control). DFAs of non-paretic eyes were larger in congenital USOP patients than in acquired USOP patients (10.3° versus 8.5°, P = 0.018).
conclusionsCongenital USOP showed greater fundus extorsion in the non-paretic eye, compared with acquired USOP. Fundus photographs of both eyes are necessary to understand the ocular torsion in USOP patients and the variations in fundus torsion with varying USOP aetiology.
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.