A Cochrane review [Abstract] 1 included 6 studies. Two trials conducted in Spain (102 people, number of eyes not specified) compared botulinum toxin with surgery in children that required retreatment for acquired or infantile esotropia. These two studies provided low-certainty evidence that children who received botulinum toxin may have a similar or slightly reduced chance of achieving ocular alignment (pooled risk ratio (RR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 1.16), binocular single vision (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.23), sensory fusion (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.23) and stereopsis (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.25) compared with children who received surgery. One trial from Canada compared botulinum toxin with surgery in 30 adults (30 eyes) with horizontal strabismus and reported a reduced chance of ocular alignment with botulinum toxin (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.85; low-certainty evidence).One trial in the UK suggested that botulinum toxin may result in a similar or slightly improved chance of ocular alignment in people with acute onset sixth nerve palsy compared with observation (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.48; 47 participants, low-certainty evidence).Very low-certainty evidence from one trial from Brazil suggested that adjuvant botulinum toxin in strabismus surgery may increase the chances of ocular alignment compared with strabismus surgery alone (RR 1.83, 95% CI 0.41 to 8.11; 23 participants).One trial from China of 47 participants (94 eyes) suggested that people receiving botulinum toxin combined with sodium hyaluronate may have a similar or slightly reduced chance of achieving ocular alignment compared with botulinum toxin alone (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.82; low-certainty evidence).Reported complications in people given botulinum toxin in the included trials included ptosis (range 9% to 41.66%) and vertical deviation (range 8.3% to 18.51%). Ptosis occurred less frequently when treated with botulinum toxin combined with sodium hyaluronate compared to botulinum toxin alone.
Comment: The quality of evidence is downgraded by study quality (inadequate allocation concealment), by inconsistency (variability in results across studies and heterogeneity in interventions and outcomes) and by imprecise results (limited study size for each comparison).
Primary/Secondary Keywords