Cochrane · systematic review · CD010293
Integrated versus non‐integrated orbital implants for treating anophthalmic sockets
Schellini, S, El Dib, R, Silva, LRE, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2016 · Cochrane Library
Eyes and VisionAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
4
current version
GRADE rated
4
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 3 · 75%Low 1 · 25%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Summary of findings
Population: people with anophthalmic sockets
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Proportion of successful procedures at 1 year and up to 5 years after surgery (no exposure/extrusion) | RR 0.92 [0.84, 1.01] | 1 study · 150 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, indirectness |
Socket and prosthesis motility (horizontal) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 100 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Socket and prosthesis motility (vertical) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 100 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Any adverse outcomes (e.g. extrusions or migration, infections, ectropion) | RR 17.82 [0.98, 324.67] | 1 study · 150 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |