Outcomes and variables that impact pneumatic retinopexies

Autor: Maria V. Castanos, Daniel Vail, Oscar Otero-Marquez, Yash Shah, Avnish Deobhakta
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2024
Předmět:
Zdroj: International Journal of Ophthalmology, Vol 17, Iss 3, Pp 564-569 (2024)
Druh dokumentu: article
ISSN: 2222-3959
2227-4898
DOI: 10.18240/ijo.2024.03.20
Popis: AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of pneumatic retinopexy (PR) in patients undergoing PR as primary treatment for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) and analyze the factors associated with success and failure in the studied population. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was done of patients with RRD treated with PR as primary management method treated at New York Eye and Ear Infirmary of Mount Sinai between January 2017 and December 2021. Primary outcome measured success or failure of PR. Secondary outcome measured best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) after PR. A separate risk analysis was done to identify and stratify risks associated with success and failure of PR. RESULTS: A total of 179 eyes from 179 patients were included for final analysis. The 83 patients (46.37%) achieved anatomical reattachment of the retina after primary PR with no need for additional surgery. The 96 patients (53.63%) had a failed primary PR and required a PPV and 6 of them required pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with scleral buckle (SB). In total, 19 cases (10.61%) were done as temporizing pneumatics, 18 (94.74%) underwent PPV, and 1 (5.26%) did not require further intervention. The visual acuities at postoperative month 1 (POM1) for patients who underwent primary PR successfully and for those that underwent PPV after, were 0.58 (20/80) and 1.03 (20/200) respectively. Patients who met Pneumatic Retinopexy Versus Vitrectomy for the Management of Primary Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment Outcomes Randomized Trial (PIVOT) criteria had a statistically significant decreased risk of primary PR failing (hazard ratio 0.29, P=0.00). Majority of missed or new breaks were found superotemporally. CONCLUSION: PR is a good treatment option for treating RRDs in patients that meet PIVOT criteria and can be conducted as a temporizing measure. PIVOT criteria and fovea on status decrease the risk of PR failure.
Databáze: Directory of Open Access Journals
Externí odkaz: