ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2024
Otolaryngologist surgical preferences for orbital decompression in thyroid eye disease: A North American survey.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 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.
- Extended endoscopic transnasal orbital decompression for dysthyroid optic neuropathy: efficacy and prognostic factors.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Otolaryngologist surgical preferences for orbital decompression in thyroid eye disease: A North American survey.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Orbital decompression is recommended for TED especially in the treatment of severe, refractory cases yet there are no clear guidelines regarding the optimal surgical approach. Previously conducted surveys assessed variations in the management of TED but only amongst ophthalmologists. Our study attempts to better characterize surgical and perioperative preferences amongst otolaryngologists in the management of TED. Methods: A survey was administered to the American Rhinologic Society and Canadian Society of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery via REDCap with 52 total respondents. Respondent demographic information and pre-operative management, procedural specifics, and post-operative management preferences were collected. Results: The majority of respondents practiced in a metropolitan (82.7%), academic setting (73.1%) and received subspecialty training in Rhinology & Skull Base Surgery (88.9%). Most elected for corticosteroids (63.5%) and medical management (69.2%) prior to orbital decompression but did not use any classification system (86.5%). Orbital decompression was most often done with ophthalmology collaboration (71.2%). Removal of two bony walls (55.8%) via medial wall (97.9%) and orbital floor (72.3%) removal was most preferred. Removal of one orbital fat aspect (60.6%) via the medial fat pad was most preferred. Combined bone and fat removal (59.6%) completed via an endoscopic approach (71.2% and 97.0%, respectively) was most common. Post-operatively, most patients were not admitted (88.4%) with saline nasal rinses (92.3%) utilized by most respondents. Conclusions: This survey completed by otolaryngologists highlights several key distinctions in the preferred surgical approach during orbital decompression and the perioperative management of TED when compared to ophthalmologists and current recommendations. Level of evidence: Level 4.
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.