
ABSTRACT Purpose: To compare the surgical results of adjustable and non-adjustable horizontal strabismus surgery for concomitant horizontal strabismus. Methods: The charts of 231 patients, who underwent horizontal strabismus surgery, selected using probabilistic sampling, were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical technique used and strabismus type. The adjustable suture technique was used for 107 patients (Group 1), and non-adjustable or conventional surgery was performed in the remaining 124 patients (Group 2). Patients with esotropia (ET) or exotropia (XT) of <55 prism diopters (PD) at distance were included. The following exclusion criteria were applied: all intermittent or vertical deviations, anisotropias >5 PD, syndromes, restrictive or paretic strabismus, reoperations, botulinum toxin injection, and patients postoperatively followed up for <3 months. Surgical success was set to a range between orthotropia and an esodeviation of up to 10 PD for both ET and XT. Results: An amblyopia rate >50% was present in all subgroups. Significant differences between strabismus groups submitted to adjustable technique and non-adjustable on postoperative day 1 were observed (p=0.00 for ET and p=0.01 for XT) and at the last visit for the XT group with a follow-up of at least 1 year (p=0.05). Conclusion: The adjustable suture technique produced a higher success rate than non-adjustable strabismus surgery for both ET and XT groups on postoperative day 1. For XT patients, the adjustable suture technique appears to produce better surgical results than non-adjustable surgery, when the surgical goal is long-lasting maintenance of a small hypercorrection.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
