Purpose: Even though it is stated that external levator advancement (ELA) has a much longer learning curve than Müller muscle-conjunctival resection (MMCR) in the treatment of aponeurotic ptosis, there is no study in the literature regarding the learning curves of these two surgical techniques. We aimed to objectively determine the length of the learning curves of ELA and MMCR using cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. Methods: The first 30 unilateral ELA and the first 30 unilateral MMCR consecutively performed by a single surgeon were retrospectively reviewed. The CUSUM method was used to analyze the learning curves of ELA and MMCR based on operation times of consecutive surgeries and the clinical outcomes were compared. Results: CUSUM analyses revealed that the operation time stabilized after around 11 ELA surgeries and 12 MMCR surgeries and R2 value for ELA and MMCR were 0.93 and 0.91, respectively. There was no significant difference in these stratified analyses. Mean operation time was 45.7 minutes in the ELA group and 34.1 minutes in the MMCR group (p = 0.002). Total number of intraoperative complications was 37 in the ELA group and 16 in the MMCR group (p = 0.015). Symmetry success rate was significantly higher (p < 0.0001) and reoperation rate was significantly lower in the MMCR group (p = 0.045). Conclusions Even though ELA is more challenging than MMCR, comparable learning curves indicate that surgeons in training need to be encouraged to perform both techniques. The challenges and obstacles that the surgeons in training face in these two techniques need to be analyzed in detail.

Purpose: Even though it is stated that external levator advancement (ELA) has a much longer learning curve than Müller muscle-conjunctival resection (MMCR) in the treatment of aponeurotic ptosis, there is no study in the literature regarding the learning curves of these two surgical techniques. We aimed to objectively determine the length of the learning curves of ELA and MMCR using cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. Methods: The first 30 unilateral ELA and the first 30 unilateral MMCR consecutively performed by a single surgeon were retrospectively reviewed. The CUSUM method was used to analyze the learning curves of ELA and MMCR based on operation times of consecutive surgeries and the clinical outcomes were compared. Results: CUSUM analyses revealed that the operation time stabilized after around 11 ELA surgeries and 12 MMCR surgeries and R2 value for ELA and MMCR were 0.93 and 0.91, respectively. There was no significant difference in these stratified analyses. Mean operation time was 45.7 minutes in the ELA group and 34.1 minutes in the MMCR group (p = 0.002). Total number of intraoperative complications was 37 in the ELA group and 16 in the MMCR group (p = 0.015). Symmetry success rate was significantly higher (p < 0.0001) and reoperation rate was significantly lower in the MMCR group (p = 0.045). Conclusions Even though ELA is more challenging than MMCR, comparable learning curves indicate that surgeons in training need to be encouraged to perform both techniques. The challenges and obstacles that the surgeons in training face in these two techniques need to be analyzed in detail.