Introduction to Versus Unilateral

To investigate the efficacy of bilateral lateral rectus recession (BLR) versus unilateral recession and resection (RR) for the treatment of patients with basic‐type intermittent exotropia (IXT).

Two RCTs compared bilateral lateral rectus recession versus unilateral lateral rectus recession with medial rectus resection, but only one RCT (n = 197) reported on the primary outcomes of this review.

The timing and surgical technique of bilateral pectoralis major muscle advancement flaps versus unilateral pectoralis major muscle turnover and unilateral pectoralis major muscle advancement flap on patient outcomes remain to be elucidated.

The aim of this study was to determine the utility of ordering bilateral versus unilateral studies to evaluate for reflux in patients with suspected CVI, to determine if there is a resource saving potential for vascular laboratories through optimization of the venous duplex study ordering process.

Conclusions This is the first study in the literature to assess the accuracy of pre-operative bone conduction in bilateral versus unilateral otosclerosis.

In the staged to bilateral DBS cohort, midline tremor scores further improved after bilateral DBS at 180 days by 63% versus unilateral DBS (3[3] to 1[3], p=0.

Conclusions In the Japanese healthcare setting, MRgFUS could be a cost saving option versus unilateral DBS for treating medication-refractory ET.

Consequently, neither measure consistently registers benefits from binaural hearing, such as those from bilateral versus unilateral cochlear implantation.

I sympathize with the authors who attempted to provide a unified answer to whether bilateral versus unilateral cochlear implantation is cost-effective.