SynthesisGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2022
Efficacy of medial rectus plication versus resection for exotropia: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the outcomes of medial rectus plication and medial rectus resection procedures in the treatment of exotropia.
methodsArticles from Pubmed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases until July 2021 with a minimum follow-up period of 1 month were retrieved. No restriction on language was applied. Eligible studies must comply with the inclusion criteria. Only studies with comparisons between unilateral medial rectus plication versus unilateral medial rectus resection, unilateral lateral rectus recession-medial rectus plication (RP) versus unilateral lateral rectus recession-medial rectus resection (RR), or bilateral medial rectus plication(BMRP) versus bilateral medial rectus resection (BMRR) would be included for subsequent analysis. Two primary outcomes were specified: success rate and mean postoperative deviation. Dichotomous data were calculated as pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and continuous data as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% CIs.
resultsA total of 8 studies with 557 participants were enrolled in the meta-analysis based on the inclusion criteria. Seven studies compared lateral rectus recession + medial rectus plication to unilateral lateral rectus recession + medial rectus resection and one study compared bilateral medial rectus plication to bilateral medial rectus resection. Differences in success rates between plication and resection groups were not statistically significant (OR = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.43-1.02; P = 0.06), and the unsatisfactory effects (the undercorrection and overcorrection rates) between the two groups were comparable. Additionally, there were also no significant differences in postoperative deviation and the amount of exodrift between the two groups.
conclusionThis meta-analysis provides evidence that both the medial rectus plication and medial rectus resection procedures have similar efficacy in the treatment of exotropia.
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.