ArticleJournal of oral biology and craniofacial research
The outcome of conventional open reduction approach vs endoscopic approach for orbital floor repair.
Article in Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Combined Open Reduction and Transantral Endoscopic Approach for Internal Fixation of Orbital Floor Fractures: A Tertiary Care Center Experience with Decision-Making Algorithm.Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Blunt trauma to the orbital rim is a frequent cause of both orbital fractures and damage to the surrounding facial bones and soft tissues. The inception of endoscopy and minimal invasive intervention has revolutionized the surgical treatment of blow out fracture of orbital walls. Thus, the present study was conducted to compare the outcome of conventional open reduction approach with endoscopic approach for orbital floor repair. Materials and method: The study included 10 patients with clinical and radiographic evidence of orbital floor fracture, divided randomly into two groups: Group I-operated using endoscopic approach; and Group II- operated using conventional external approach. All the patients were evaluated clinically preoperatively, immediate post-operative and after 1 month for Diplopia, Extrinsic ocular motility, Enophthalmos and Hypoglobus. Results: The study consisted of 40% females and 60% males, with mean age of Endoscopic and Conventional group being 27.20 ± 6.14 years and 27.60 ± 7.23 years respectively. In relation to diplopia, an insignificant difference was observed statistically. The mean change in enophthalmos and hypoglobus in endoscopic and conventional group showed a significant difference statistically (p < 0.001). Unrestricted ocular motility was present only in one case of each group and significantly increased to 5 cases in both the groups (p = 0.048). The mean duration of surgery in endoscopic and conventional group showed a significant difference statistically. Conclusion: Diplopia, hypoglobus and Enophthalmos correction was better achieved in endoscopic group as compared to conventional group. But duration of surgery was more in endoscopic group as compared to conventional group.
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.