Eye-opener: Lateral canthotomy in pigs: A randomised study.

Friedrich Lersch, Pascal Jerney, Kati Haenssgen, Joana Berger-Estilita

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in European journal of anaesthesiology and intensive care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Friedrich LerschFrom the Department of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland (FL, PJ), FMI, Spitäler Frutigen Meiringen Interlaken AG, Unterseen, Switzerland (PJ), Institute of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Salemspital, Hirslanden Medical Group, Bern, Switzerland (JB-E), Institute for Medical Education, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland (JB-E), CINTESIS@RISE, Centre for Health Technology and Services Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal (JB-E), Institute of Anatomy, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland (KH), and Division of Veterinary Anatomy, Department of Clinical Research and Veterinary Public Health, Vetsuisse-Faculty, University of Bern, Switzerland (KH).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5090-4989

Pascal JerneyFrom the Department of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland (FL, PJ), FMI, Spitäler Frutigen Meiringen Interlaken AG, Unterseen, Switzerland (PJ), Institute of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Salemspital, Hirslanden Medical Group, Bern, Switzerland (JB-E), Institute for Medical Education, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland (JB-E), CINTESIS@RISE, Centre for Health Technology and Services Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal (JB-E), Institute of Anatomy, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland (KH), and Division of Veterinary Anatomy, Department of Clinical Research and Veterinary Public Health, Vetsuisse-Faculty, University of Bern, Switzerland (KH).

Kati HaenssgenFrom the Department of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland (FL, PJ), FMI, Spitäler Frutigen Meiringen Interlaken AG, Unterseen, Switzerland (PJ), Institute of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Salemspital, Hirslanden Medical Group, Bern, Switzerland (JB-E), Institute for Medical Education, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland (JB-E), CINTESIS@RISE, Centre for Health Technology and Services Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal (JB-E), Institute of Anatomy, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland (KH), and Division of Veterinary Anatomy, Department of Clinical Research and Veterinary Public Health, Vetsuisse-Faculty, University of Bern, Switzerland (KH).

Joana Berger-EstilitaFrom the Department of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland (FL, PJ), FMI, Spitäler Frutigen Meiringen Interlaken AG, Unterseen, Switzerland (PJ), Institute of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Salemspital, Hirslanden Medical Group, Bern, Switzerland (JB-E), Institute for Medical Education, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland (JB-E), CINTESIS@RISE, Centre for Health Technology and Services Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal (JB-E), Institute of Anatomy, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland (KH), and Division of Veterinary Anatomy, Department of Clinical Research and Veterinary Public Health, Vetsuisse-Faculty, University of Bern, Switzerland (KH).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRegional Anaesthesia of the eye, including techniques like retrobulbar, peribulbar, and sub-Tenon's block, is essential for a wide range of ophthalmologic surgeries. These techniques carry risks of severe complications as retrobulbar haemorrhage and infraorbital compartment syndrome, potentially entailing vision loss. Lateral canthotomy with inferior cantholysis (LCIC) is a crucial emergency procedure to manage such complications, and its proficiency among clinicians is vital.

objectiveThis study aims to validate a pig-head teaching model by investigating intra-ocular pressure (IOP) variations during simulated intra-orbital haemorrhage and following LCIC procedure.

designRandomised comparative study.

settingSingle centre, tertiary university hospital, Berne, Switzerland, January and February 2023. SUBJECTS: Thirteen fresh porcine heads from the local abattoir were used to create a model of retrobulbar haemorrhage.

interventionsAfter visual inspection, we injected 25 ml of hydroxyethyl starch to simulate haemorrhage. IOP measurements were taken at baseline (T0), after injection (T1), immediately after LCIC (T2), and 10 min post-LCIC (T3). The LCIC procedure was performed on randomly selected eyes. Spontaneous regression of intra-ocular pressure was studied without LCIC being performed in control eyes.

main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the difference in IOP trends between the LCIC and control groups. Secondary outcomes included the rate and extent of IOP reduction post-LCIC. Descriptive statistics and repeated measures ANOVA were used to analyse IOP measurements, with posthoc analysis applied where significant differences were found.

resultsBaseline IOP showed no significant differences between groups. Postinjection IOP increased significantly in all eyes. LCIC resulted in a median IOP decrease of -45.8 mmHg, compared to -20.9 mmHg in the control group ( DISCUSSION: LCIC significantly reduced IOP immediately and 10 min postprocedure compared to controls in simulated retrobulbar haemorrhage. The study supports the clinical utility of the LCIC procedure in managing acute orbital compartment syndrome and validates the pig head model as training device of moderate to high fidelity.

Identifiers

PMID41079981

DOI10.1097/EA9.0000000000000081

PMCPMC12513446

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY-NC-ND

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.