ReviewFrontiers in surgery2026
Müller muscle-conjunctival resection in modern ptosis surgery: patient selection, technical refinements, and expanding indications.
Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Müller muscle-conjunctival resection (MMCR) has traditionally been regarded as a posterior approach for mild-to-moderate blepharoptosis in patients with good levator function and a positive response to phenylephrine. Its contemporary role, however, is considerably broader. Accumulating evidence supports the use of MMCR in selected patients with limited or absent phenylephrine responsiveness, more severe ptosis, postoperative eyelid asymmetry, and carefully chosen congenital, neurogenic, or neuromuscular forms of ptosis. In parallel, modifications that incorporate tarsectomy, simplified suturing, conjunctiva-sparing approaches, perioperative bandage contact lenses, and targeted hemostatic maneuvers have sought to improve predictability, comfort, and safety. Important uncertainties nevertheless remain. The mechanism by which MMCR elevates the eyelid is not fully explained by smooth-muscle excision alone; the predictive value of phenylephrine testing is inconsistent; and no single resection algorithm has proved universally reliable. Moreover, surgical success is still reported using heterogeneous definitions that may underrepresent eyelid contour, bilateral symmetry, ocular-surface health, and patient-reported benefit. This review examines the anatomical basis, patient-selection principles, operative algorithms, technical refinements, comparative outcomes, perioperative management, complications, and expanding indications of MMCR. Particular attention is given to the clinical settings in which posterior ptosis surgery may offer practical advantages over external levator advancement and to the limits of the available evidence. Modern MMCR is best understood not as a single formula-driven operation, but as an adaptable posterior lamellar platform whose results depend on individualized planning, meticulous execution, and assessment extending beyond eyelid height alone.
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.