ArticleEye (London, England)2024
Lateral tarsal strip procedure: comparison of absorbable sutures and non-absorbable polypropylene suture. Does the suture type matter?
Article in Eye (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prospective randomised controlled trial to compare tissue reactions and scarring with polypropylene versus polyglactin 910 sutures in periocular skin.The British journal of ophthalmology · 2026Trial
- Absorbable Sutures are Equally Efficacious to Non-absorbable Sutures in Upper Eyelid Blepharoplasty for Dermatochalasis: A Comparative Study.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesTo determine whether the success and complication rates of the Lateral Tarsal Strip (LTS) Procedure, when treating involutional ectropion/entropion, is influenced by the use of suture when attaching the tarsal strip to the periosteum. SUBJECTS/
methodsMulti-centre retrospective comparative study of re-operation and complication rates (Recurrence, Dehiscence, Suture Infection, Granuloma, Haemorrhage, Residual-Lid Laxity, Suture Extrusion and Repeat Procedure) in LTS, between 01/01/2017 and 01/01/2022 who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria, for involutional ectropion/entropion using an absorbable polyglactin (vicryl) and non-absorbable polypropylene suture (prolene).
results1079 operations in 891 patients (36% female, average age 81.4 years) were performed with an average follow-up of 1.785 years. 588 operations in 475 patients were performed using prolene whilst 491 procedures in 416 patients were performed using vicryl sutures. Of these, 61% were performed by a consultant surgeon in the prolene group compared to 49.7% in the vicryl group. Overall complication rates between prolene and vicryl were 24.7% and 29.7% (p = 0.061) respectively. Higher complication rates for post-operative residual lid laxity, granuloma and suture infection were greater in the vicryl group versus prolene (2.65% and 0.51% p = 0.004, 2.24% and 0.68% p = 0.03, 1.83% and 0.17% p = 0.007 respectively). Non-significant results for dehiscence or repeat procedures (2.24% and 2.21% p = 0.974, 6.72% and 9.01% p = 0.166 respectively).
conclusionsBoth sutures are effective for the correction of involutional ectropion/entropion with LTS. Dehiscence and redo rates were not statistically significant. Nevertheless, the use of vicryl suture was found to be associated with a higher complication rate for: post-operative residual lid laxity, granuloma and suture infection.
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.