Routine use of non-absorbable sutures in bi-medial rectus recession as a measure to reduce the incidence of consecutive exotropia

2Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the incidence of consecutive exotropia following bilateral medial rectus muscle recession surgery (BMR) for esotropia using non-absorbable compared with absorbable sutures in children undergoing strabismus surgery. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of all children with esotropia who underwent BMR by a single surgeon in a tertiary public hospital. As of February 2018, only non-absorbable sutures were used. The primary outcome was the incidence of consecutive exotropia. Results: A total of 121 children were included in the analysis, 3.66 ± 2.62 years, 53% were male. In 80 children (66%) non-absorbable sutures were used (non-absorbable group) and in 41 children (34%) absorbable sutures were used (absorbable group). Consecutive exotropia (≥ 8 prism dioptres) occurred in ten children (24%) in the absorbable group and in three children (4%) in the non-absorbable group (OR = 8.28, 95% CI = 2.13–32.13; P = 0.002). This difference between groups remained significant after adjustment for potential confounders and follow-up time (HR = 4.98, 95% CI = 1.30–19.05, P = 0.019). Mean follow-up time was 22 and 12 months in the absorbable and non-absorbable groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Two children in the non-absorbable group had pyogenic granuloma that resolved after 3 months of topical steroidal therapy. Conclusion: Routine use of non-absorbable sutures in BMR surgery for esotropia may be a preferable alternative to absorbable sutures for the prevention of consecutive exotropia.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dubinsky-Pertzov, B., Einan-Lifshitz, A., Pras, E., Hartstein, M. E., & Morad, Y. (2022). Routine use of non-absorbable sutures in bi-medial rectus recession as a measure to reduce the incidence of consecutive exotropia. Eye (Basingstoke), 36(9), 1772–1776. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-021-01724-6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free