This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy).

The article tested the assumption during horizontal ductions that tables typically recommend greater lateral rectus than medical rectus surgical doses for horizontal strabismus of any given magnitude. The authors were made aware of a flaw in their analysis, and after re-analyzing MRI data on the ocular center of rotation using the appropriate mathematics acknowledge that the data in Table 2 of the paper are quantitatively inaccurate, and correct only insofar as the ocular rotational axis is in fact different from the geometric center of the globe. This fundamentally undermines the stated attempt to demonstrate that eccentric location of the ocular rotation axis towards the medial rectus and away from the lateral rectus explains the differential effect of medial and lateral rectus muscle procedures.

本文已被撤消：请参阅Elsevier关于文章撤回的政策（http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy）。

这篇文章测试了水平引诱期间的假设，即对于任何给定大小的水平斜视，桌子通常建议使用比医用直肌手术剂量更大的外侧直肌。作者意识到了他们的分析中的缺陷，并且使用适当的数学方法对眼球旋转中心的MRI数据进行了重新分析后，他们承认论文表2中的数据在数量上是不准确的，并且仅在眼球范围内进行校正旋转轴实际上不同于地球仪的几何中心。这从根本上破坏了上述尝试，即试图证明眼旋转轴偏向内侧直肌并远离外侧直肌解释了内侧和外侧直肌操作的不同效果。