ArticleTaiwan journal of ophthalmology
Anterior lamellar recession versus bilamellar tarsal rotation in upper lid cicatricial trichiasis.
Article in Taiwan journal of ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn recent years, there has been a significant shift from this destructive procedure to a reconstructive procedure such as anterior lamellar recession (ALR) and bilamellar tarsal rotation (BLTR). The aim is to report the outcomes and success rates of ALR compared to BLTR in patients with upper lid cicatricial trichiasis. MATERIALS AND
methodsOur study is a prospective, interventional, comparative study that was conducted at the Ophthalmology Department of Al-Azhar University Hospital, New Damietta, Egypt. Our study was conducted on 62 eyes of 45 consecutive patients suffering from upper lid cicatricial trichiasis that required surgical intervention (17 patients were bilateral and 28 were unilateral). Thirty-three of them were treated by ALR (group 1), and 29 of them by BLTR (group 2). All statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS version 26.
resultsAs regards the immediate postoperative correction, we found that adequate correction was significantly higher in the ALR group at all follow-up periods (
conclusionALR is better than BLTR in the treatment of upper lid cicatricial trichiasis.
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.