ReviewOphthalmology2022
Adjustable Sutures in the Treatment of Strabismus: A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.
Review in Ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strabismus Surgery in Orthophoric Patients with Abduction Limitation.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Usefulness Assessment of Automated Strabismus Angle Measurements Using Innovative Strabiscan Device.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Early and delayed suture adjustments after adjustable suture strabismus surgery: a randomized controlled trial.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo review the scientific literature that evaluates the effectiveness of adjustable sutures in the management of strabismus for adult and pediatric patients.
methodsLiterature searches were performed in the PubMed database through April 2021 with no date limitations and were restricted to publications in English. The searches identified 551 relevant citations, of which 55 were reviewed in full text. Of these, 17 articles met the inclusion criteria and were assigned a level of evidence rating by the panel methodologist. The search included all randomized controlled studies regardless of study size and cohort studies of 100 or more patients comparing the adjustable versus nonadjustable suture technique, with a focus on motor alignment outcomes or reoperation rates.
resultsThe literature search yielded no level I studies. Of the 17 articles that met the inclusion criteria, 11 were rated level II and 6 were rated level III. Among the 12 studies that focused on motor alignment outcomes, 4 small randomized clinical trials (RCTs) did not find a statistically significant difference between groups, although they were powered to detect only very large differences. Seven of 8 nonrandomized studies found a statistically significant difference in motor alignment success in favor of the adjustable suture technique, both overall and in certain subgroups of patients. Successful motor alignment was seen in both exotropia (in 3 studies that were not limited to children) and esotropia (in 1 study of adults and 2 of children). The majority of included studies that reported on reoperation rates found the rates to be lower in patients who underwent strabismus surgery with adjustable sutures, but this finding was not uniformly demonstrated.
conclusionsAlthough there are no level I studies evaluating the effectiveness of adjustable sutures for strabismus surgery, the majority of nonrandomized studies that met the inclusion criteria for this assessment reported an advantage of the adjustable suture technique over the nonadjustable technique with respect to motor alignment outcomes. This finding was not uniformly demonstrated among all studies reviewed and warrants further investigation in the development and analysis of adjustable suture techniques.
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.