ArticleBMC ophthalmology2026
Motor alignment and sensory outcomes in pediatric patients with basic-type intermittent exotropia after bilateral lateral rectus recession versus unilateral recession-resection.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare motor alignment and sensory outcomes after bilateral lateral rectus recession (BLR) versus unilateral lateral rectus recession with medial rectus resection (R&R) in children with basic-type intermittent exotropia (IXT).
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 48 patients with basic-type IXT who underwent BLR (n = 26) or unilateral R&R (n = 22). Assessments were performed preoperatively and at 1 month and 1 year postoperatively. Deviation angles were measured in prism diopters (PD). Near stereopsis was analyzed after log transformation, and sensory status was evaluated using the Worth 4-dot test. The primary outcome was 1-year motor success, defined as a residual deviation ≤ 10 PD.
resultsBaseline characteristics were similar between groups (all p > 0.05). Motor success rates were comparable between BLR and R&R at 1 month (92% vs. 91%; p = 1.000) and 1 year (88% vs. 86%; p = 1.000). Orthophoria rates (77% vs. 68%; p = 0.497) and reoperation rates (12% vs. 14%; p = 0.827) were also similar. Deviation decreased significantly over time (p < 0.001). Stereopsis improved postoperatively and was maintained at 1 year (p < 0.001). In an exploratory multivariable analysis, higher preoperative deviation was associated with lower odds of motor success (aOR 0.71; p = 0.024); however, this estimate should be interpreted cautiously because of the limited number of failure events.
conclusionsBLR and unilateral R&R yielded comparable motor and sensory outcomes at 1 year postoperatively in basic-type IXT. The exploratory association between higher preoperative deviation and lower motor success requires confirmation in larger cohorts.
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.