↓ Skip to main content

Surgical interventions for vertical strabismus in superior oblique palsy

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Surgical interventions for vertical strabismus in superior oblique palsy
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2017
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd012447.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Melinda Y Chang, Anne L Coleman, Victoria L Tseng, Joseph L Demer

Abstract

Superior oblique palsy is a common cause of vertical strabismus in adults and children. Patients may be symptomatic from binocular vertical diplopia or compensatory head tilt required to maintain single vision. Most patients who are symptomatic elect to undergo strabismus surgery, but the optimal surgical treatment for vertical strabismus in people with superior oblique palsy is unknown. To assess the relative effects of surgical treatments compared with another surgical intervention, non-surgical intervention, or observation for vertical strabismus in people with superior oblique palsy. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2016, Issue 12), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 13 December 2016), Embase Ovid (1947 to 13 December 2016), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (1982 to 13 December 2016), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch); searched 13 December 2016, ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov); searched 13 December 2016, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en); searched 13 December 2016. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We included randomized trials that compared at least one type of surgical intervention to another surgical or non-surgical intervention or observation. Two review authors independently completed eligibility screening, data abstraction, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and grading of the evidence. We identified two randomized trials comparing four different surgical treatments for this condition, two methods in each trial. The studies included a total of 45 children and adults. The surgical treatments were all procedures to weaken the ipsilateral inferior oblique muscle. One study compared inferior oblique myectomy to recession of 10 mm; the other study compared inferior oblique disinsertion to anterior transposition (2 mm anterior to the temporal border of the inferior rectus insertion).We judged both studies to be at unclear risk of bias due to incomplete reporting of methods and other methodological deficiencies.Neither study reported data on the primary outcome of this review, which was the proportion of participants with postoperative surgical success, defined as hypertropia less than 3 prism diopters (PD) in primary gaze. However, both studies reported the average reduction in hypertropia in primary gaze. One study found that at 12 months' postoperatively the average decrease in hypertropia was higher in participants who underwent inferior oblique myectomy than in those who underwent recession, however data were not available for statistical comparison. The other trial found that after at least six months of follow-up, the mean decrease in primary position hypertropia was lower in participants who underwent inferior oblique disinsertion than in those who underwent anterior transposition (mean difference (MD) -5.20 PD, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.76 to -2.64; moderate-quality evidence).Both trials also reported the average postoperative reduction in vertical deviation in adduction. One study reported that the average reduction in hypertropia in adduction was greater in participants who underwent inferior oblique myectomy than in those who underwent recession, but data were not available for statistical comparison. The other study found a lower decrease in hypertropia in contralateral gaze in participants who underwent inferior oblique disinsertion than in those who underwent anterior transposition (MD -7.10 PD, 95% CI -13.85 to -0.35; moderate-quality evidence).Secondary outcomes with sufficient data for analysis included proportion of participants with preoperative head tilt that resolved postoperatively and proportion of participants who underwent a second surgery. These outcomes were assessed in the trial comparing inferior oblique anterior transposition to disinsertion; both outcomes favored anterior transposition (risk ratio 7.00, 95% CI 0.40 to 121.39 for both outcomes; very low-quality evidence). None of the participants who underwent inferior oblique anterior transposition or disinsertion developed postoperative hypotropia or reversal of the vertical deviation. All participants who underwent inferior oblique anterior transposition developed elevation deficiency, which the authors deemed to be clinically insignificant in all cases, whereas no participants who underwent inferior oblique disinsertion experienced this complication. Additionally, the trial comparing inferior oblique myectomy to recession reported that no participant in either group required another strabismus surgery during the postoperative period. The two trials included in this review evaluated four inferior oblique weakening procedures for surgical treatment of superior oblique palsy. We found no trials comparing other types of surgical procedures for this disorder. Both studies had enrolled a small number of participants and provided low-quality evidence due to limitations in completeness and applicability. We therefore found no high-quality evidence to support recommendations for optimal surgical treatment of superior oblique palsy. Rigorously designed, conducted, and reported randomized trials are needed to identify the optimal surgical treatment for vertical strabismus in this disorder.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 143 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 13%
Student > Bachelor 17 12%
Researcher 12 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 7%
Student > Postgraduate 7 5%
Other 25 17%
Unknown 53 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 13%
Psychology 5 3%
Unspecified 4 3%
Computer Science 3 2%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 56 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 February 2023.
All research outputs
#2,638,630
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,246
of 12,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,439
of 447,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#108
of 171 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,090 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 447,011 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 171 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.