Reply

Garweg, Justus G.; Deiss, Mario; Pfister, Isabel B.; Gerhardt, Christin

doi:10.1097/iae.0000000000002741

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…27,28 The lack of postoperative ERM formation can be explained by the systematic use of ILM peeling in all patients. 40 However, based on our retrospective analysis, an advantage for visual outcomes after peeling was not observed using SO compared to the successful use of SF 6 gas tamponade 29 but was similar to non-ILM peeled eyes. 41 The rates of new PVR formation (17% vs 13%, p=0.73) and of re-detachment after SO removal were comparable in both groups and within the expected range (17% vs 15%, p=0.73), suggesting that secondary SO placement after failed primary vitrectomy with gas tamponade does not expose the eye to an additional PVR risk.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 64%

Impact of Vitreal Tamponade on Functional Outcomes in Vitrectomy with ILM Peeling in Primary Macula-Involving Retinal Detachment: A Retrospective Analysis

Deiss

Kaya²,

Pfister³

et al. 2020

OPTH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background To compare visual outcomes of vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling and failed SF 6 gas tamponade requiring silicone oil (SO) in a second procedure with primary SO tamponade in fovea-involving retinal detachment (FiRD). Methods Retrospective analysis of 82 eyes with retinal detachment and mild, but without advanced proliferative retinopathy (PVR ≥C2) requiring vitrectomy for FiRD. Group 1 comprised 23 eyes that underwent SF 6 tamponade resulting in re-detachment requiring revision surgery with secondary SO tamponade. Based on the intraoperative findings, group 2 patients had primarily received SO as vitreal tamponade (n=59). Patients receiving a scleral buckle surgery or with advanced PVR as well as patients with underlying vascular diseases and uveitis were excluded. Results Preoperative visual acuity (Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters) was 13.5 ± 19.1 in group 1 and 14.0 ± 18.3 in group 2 ( p =0.44). Twelve months after first surgery for FiRD, visual acuity was 49.8 ± 19.8 in group 1 and 51.7 ± 18.7 letters in group 2 ( p= 0.63). Re-detachment after SO removal requiring revision surgery developed in 17.4 (n=4) and 15.3% (n=9) cases. Conclusion Our findings suggest that if retinal traction is completely relieved at the end of surgery, vitrectomy with ILM peeling and SF 6 may, if successful, improve the functional outcomes in instances with visual potential, ie, a foveal detachment of short duration despite the presence of a mild to moderate PVR, but with the inherent increased risk of re-detachment requiring further intervention and the use of a SO tamponade. Hence, secondary SO installation during re-vitrectomy after failed primary reattachment surgery results in similar functional outcomes as primary oil filling.

show abstract