Adjustable Sutures in Strabismus Surgery: A Personal Series of Cases

Agnello, Ross

doi:10.1111/j.1442-9071.1986.tb00026.x

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the study by Weston et al (n = 201 consecutive patients), just 40% of cases required suture adjustment, while the remaining 60% were simply tied off [25]. Agnello et al reported a necessity for adjustment in 62.3% of their AS strabismus surgeries (48/77 patients) [26]. Pratt-Johnson et al reported 48.2% (123/255) of patients required adjustment in AS surgery cases [27].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adjustable Versus Nonadjustable Sutures in Strabismus Surgery—Who Benefits the Most?

Gawęcki¹

2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Adjustable sutures have been used in strabismus surgery for more than 40 years, but controversy remains regarding their application. This review sought to analyze studies comparing the efficacy of adjustable sutures (AS) and nonadjustable sutures (NAS) in the treatment of different ocular deviations. Materials and Methods: The PubMed literature database was searched using the keywords ‘adjustable sutures’ and ‘strabismus surgery’, yielding a total of 209 results. Only comparative studies were extracted, and the results were divided into three categories: Adult comitant strabismus, childhood comitant strabismus, and paretic/restrictive strabismus. Results: The search revealed eleven comparative studies on AS versus NAS in adult strabismus, including only one randomized controlled trial. Five of these studies analyzed just the postoperative success rate, three studies analyzed just the reoperation rate, two studies analyzed both the postoperative success and reoperation rates, and one study evaluated achievement of the postoperative target angle. Three of seven studies analyzing postoperative success reported the statically significant superiority of AS over NAS, while four of five studies analyzing reoperation rate indicated a significantly smaller percentage of reoperations with the use of AS. The study covering postoperative target angle as an outcome favored the AS technique. Separately, the search revealed three comparative studies on AS versus NAS in childhood strabismus, one of which reported a statistically significant advantage with AS. Only four comparative studies on AS versus NAS in paretic or restrictive strabismus were found; all showed a tendency for better results with the use of AS but not in a statistically significant fashion. Overall, out of 18 studies analyzed in this review, 17 suggested better clinical results followed the application of AS versus NAS; however, only a minority had statistically significant results. Conclusion: The analysis of available research failed to support AS as the preferable surgery technique over NAS in cases of simple and predictive strabismus. Further research is needed to more precisely determine the group of patients able to benefit the most from AS.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%