ArticleBMC ophthalmology2025
Botulinum toxin for acute acquired comitant esotropia: clinical outcomes and predictors.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative efficacy of botulinum toxin and surgical treatment for acute acquired concomitant esotropia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo assess the effectiveness of botulinum toxin type A (BTXA) in treating acute acquired comitant esotropia (AACE), and to explore its possible influencing factors.
methodsA retrospective analysis of 35 AACE patients who received BTXA microinjections between July 2023 and November 2024 was conducted for this study. Record the deviation angle, simultaneous vision function, fusion function, distant and near stereopsis before and after BTXA injection. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the Exact McNemar test were used to compare the data before and after injection. Univariate logistic regression analysis and Multivariable logistic regression analysis were used to explore the factors related to therapeutic effect.
resultsThe patients’ average age of onset was 8.86 ± 4.16 years (range: 3 to 21 years). The mean duration of strabismus was 3.37 ± 3.27 months (range: 0.23 to 14 months). All patients were followed up at least 6 months after BTXA injection, with an average follow-up time of 8.49 ± 3.82 months (range: 6 to 17 months). Compared with the deviation angle before BTXA injection, the deviation angle of both near (p < 0.001) and distant (p < 0.001) fixation after injection was significantly lower. The success rate was 80% in our study. The positive rate of simultaneous vision (p = 0.002), fusion range (P < 0.001), positive rate of distant stereopsis (p = 0.013) and near stereopsis (P < 0.001) were all improved after BTXA treatment. The age of onset(OR = 1.477, 95%CI 1.052–2.073, P = 0.024), duration of strabismus (OR = 1.615, 95%CI 1.088–2.396, P = 0.017) and fusion range before injection (OR = 0.722, 95%CI 0.541–0.963, P = 0.027) are related to recurrence. The duration of strabismus (OR = 0.799,95%CI 0.643–0.993, p = 0.043) was also related to the near stereoacuity after injection.
conclusionBTXA injection can effectively decrease the deviation angle while also restoring the binocular visual function (BVF) of AACE patients. The duration of strabismus, age of onset, and BVF before injection may be important factors affecting the efficacy of BTXA.
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.