ArticleTaiwan journal of ophthalmology
Simplified segmental scleral buckling without localization and cryopexy: A retrospective comparison with conventional segmental scleral buckling.
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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to propose a simplified segmental scleral buckling (SSSB) technique that does not require break localization for less-experienced vitreoretinal surgeons. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study compared the clinical results of 46 conventional and 23 SSSB (conventional segmental SB [CSSB] and SSSB, respectively) procedures in a tertiary referral retinal center in Taiwan between 2008 and 2019. In the CSSB group, breaks were localized during surgery. In the SSSB group, a wider sponge band and a longer scleral buckle were used to maximize the chances of sealing the retinal breaks based on the preoperative fundus examination findings and to minimize the positioning error caused by cyclotorsion, without performing indirect ophthalmoscopy. The primary outcome was assessed after 6 months. Patient characteristics, surgical parameters, and outcomes were compared between groups. The main outcomes were the duration of surgery, changes in visual acuity, primary success rate, rhegmatogenous retinal detachment recurrence rate, and the frequency of further laser photocoagulation.
resultsSSSB had a shorter duration than CSSB and was associated with more frequent use of longer and wider explants and need for further laser retinopexy. Both groups showed high primary success rates (95.65%).
conclusionThe primary success rates for the SSSB and CSSB groups were comparable and equally high. SSSB required laser retinopexy more frequently and was a shorter procedure.
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.