甲状腺眼病眼眶减压后眼球突出复位的手术间差异:一项多中心分析。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Ashley Hong, Marissa K Shoji, George A Villatoro, Bharanidharan Radha-Saseendrakumar, Sally L Baxter, Peter J Dolman, Michael Kazim, Andrew R Harrison, Mark J Lucarelli, James A Garrity, Dinesh Selva, Lilangi S Ediriwickrema, Catherine Y Liu, Bobby S Korn, Don O Kikkawa
{"title":"甲状腺眼病眼眶减压后眼球突出复位的手术间差异:一项多中心分析。","authors":"Ashley Hong, Marissa K Shoji, George A Villatoro, Bharanidharan Radha-Saseendrakumar, Sally L Baxter, Peter J Dolman, Michael Kazim, Andrew R Harrison, Mark J Lucarelli, James A Garrity, Dinesh Selva, Lilangi S Ediriwickrema, Catherine Y Liu, Bobby S Korn, Don O Kikkawa","doi":"10.1097/IOP.0000000000003090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study assesses intersurgeon variability in proptosis reduction after orbital decompression for thyroid eye disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This multicenter retrospective study included patients with thyroid eye disease who underwent orbital decompression from 1 of 7 surgeons at 7 different institutions between January 2002 and December 2018. Data were included if a single decompression technique was performed on ≥10 patients by ≥2 surgeons. The primary outcome was postoperative change in proptosis with emphasis on comparison among surgeons utilizing similar surgical techniques. Statistical analysis was performed with χ2 and ANOVA testing, and a multivariable logistic regression model was generated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six hundred thirty-three orbits that underwent orbital decompression were included. Five different decompression techniques were analyzed: medial wall (n = 29), fat + lateral wall (n = 113), medial wall + floor (n = 123), fat + lateral wall + medial wall (n = 140), and fat + lateral wall + medial wall + floor (n = 228), without significant difference in proptosis reduction among surgeons. Surgeons did not demonstrate significant differences in outcomes at different time points compared with each other or themselves. Outcomes when comparing endoscopic versus open medial wall decompression varied among surgery types. Multivariate modeling revealed a statistically significant association between postoperative change in proptosis with preoperative proptosis (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Postoperative change in proptosis did not differ significantly between surgeons utilizing similar orbital decompression techniques for patients with thyroid eye disease. This study may strengthen the statistical validity of multicenter clinical trials assessing orbital decompression outcomes performed by surgeons employing uniform surgical techniques, thereby advancing our understanding of optimal surgical management strategies for thyroid eye disease.</p>","PeriodicalId":19588,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intersurgeon Variability in Proptosis Reduction After Orbital Decompression for Thyroid Eye Disease: A Multicenter Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Ashley Hong, Marissa K Shoji, George A Villatoro, Bharanidharan Radha-Saseendrakumar, Sally L Baxter, Peter J Dolman, Michael Kazim, Andrew R Harrison, Mark J Lucarelli, James A Garrity, Dinesh Selva, Lilangi S Ediriwickrema, Catherine Y Liu, Bobby S Korn, Don O Kikkawa\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/IOP.0000000000003090\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study assesses intersurgeon variability in proptosis reduction after orbital decompression for thyroid eye disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This multicenter retrospective study included patients with thyroid eye disease who underwent orbital decompression from 1 of 7 surgeons at 7 different institutions between January 2002 and December 2018. Data were included if a single decompression technique was performed on ≥10 patients by ≥2 surgeons. The primary outcome was postoperative change in proptosis with emphasis on comparison among surgeons utilizing similar surgical techniques. Statistical analysis was performed with χ2 and ANOVA testing, and a multivariable logistic regression model was generated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six hundred thirty-three orbits that underwent orbital decompression were included. Five different decompression techniques were analyzed: medial wall (n = 29), fat + lateral wall (n = 113), medial wall + floor (n = 123), fat + lateral wall + medial wall (n = 140), and fat + lateral wall + medial wall + floor (n = 228), without significant difference in proptosis reduction among surgeons. Surgeons did not demonstrate significant differences in outcomes at different time points compared with each other or themselves. Outcomes when comparing endoscopic versus open medial wall decompression varied among surgery types. Multivariate modeling revealed a statistically significant association between postoperative change in proptosis with preoperative proptosis (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Postoperative change in proptosis did not differ significantly between surgeons utilizing similar orbital decompression techniques for patients with thyroid eye disease. This study may strengthen the statistical validity of multicenter clinical trials assessing orbital decompression outcomes performed by surgeons employing uniform surgical techniques, thereby advancing our understanding of optimal surgical management strategies for thyroid eye disease.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19588,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/IOP.0000000000003090\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/IOP.0000000000003090","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究评估甲状腺眼病眼眶减压术后眼球突出复位的手术间变异性。方法:本多中心回顾性研究纳入了2002年1月至2018年12月在7个不同机构的7名外科医生中的1名接受眶减压的甲状腺眼病患者。如果在≥10例患者中由≥2名外科医生实施单一减压技术,则纳入数据。主要结果是术后预后的改变,重点是使用类似手术技术的外科医生之间的比较。采用χ2和ANOVA检验进行统计学分析,并建立多变量logistic回归模型。结果:共纳入633例行眶内减压手术。分析了5种不同的减压技术:内侧壁(n = 29)、脂肪+侧壁(n = 113)、内侧壁+底(n = 123)、脂肪+外侧壁+内侧壁(n = 140)、脂肪+外侧壁+内侧壁+底(n = 228),术者间突出复位无显著差异。外科医生在不同时间点的结果与彼此或他们自己相比没有显着差异。比较内窥镜与开放式内侧壁减压的结果因手术类型而异。多变量模型显示术后预后变化与术前预后有统计学意义的关联(p < 0.001)。结论:使用相似眶减压技术治疗甲状腺眼病患者的外科医生之间的术后眼球突出变化无显著差异。本研究可能加强多中心临床试验的统计有效性,评估采用统一手术技术的外科医生进行眶减压的结果,从而促进我们对甲状腺眼病最佳手术管理策略的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Intersurgeon Variability in Proptosis Reduction After Orbital Decompression for Thyroid Eye Disease: A Multicenter Analysis.

Purpose: This study assesses intersurgeon variability in proptosis reduction after orbital decompression for thyroid eye disease.

Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included patients with thyroid eye disease who underwent orbital decompression from 1 of 7 surgeons at 7 different institutions between January 2002 and December 2018. Data were included if a single decompression technique was performed on ≥10 patients by ≥2 surgeons. The primary outcome was postoperative change in proptosis with emphasis on comparison among surgeons utilizing similar surgical techniques. Statistical analysis was performed with χ2 and ANOVA testing, and a multivariable logistic regression model was generated.

Results: Six hundred thirty-three orbits that underwent orbital decompression were included. Five different decompression techniques were analyzed: medial wall (n = 29), fat + lateral wall (n = 113), medial wall + floor (n = 123), fat + lateral wall + medial wall (n = 140), and fat + lateral wall + medial wall + floor (n = 228), without significant difference in proptosis reduction among surgeons. Surgeons did not demonstrate significant differences in outcomes at different time points compared with each other or themselves. Outcomes when comparing endoscopic versus open medial wall decompression varied among surgery types. Multivariate modeling revealed a statistically significant association between postoperative change in proptosis with preoperative proptosis (p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Postoperative change in proptosis did not differ significantly between surgeons utilizing similar orbital decompression techniques for patients with thyroid eye disease. This study may strengthen the statistical validity of multicenter clinical trials assessing orbital decompression outcomes performed by surgeons employing uniform surgical techniques, thereby advancing our understanding of optimal surgical management strategies for thyroid eye disease.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
322
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery features original articles and reviews on topics such as ptosis, eyelid reconstruction, orbital diagnosis and surgery, lacrimal problems, and eyelid malposition. Update reports on diagnostic techniques, surgical equipment and instrumentation, and medical therapies are included, as well as detailed analyses of recent research findings and their clinical applications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信