BACKGROUND: Arteriovenous (AV) sheathotomy, a potential treatment for branch retinal vein occlusion (BVO), surgically separates retinal vessels at an AV crossing. Relief of the aetiological obstruction, with resolution of cystoid macular oedema (CMO), may result in improved visual acuity. METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive cases of AV sheathotomy for BVO was undertaken. Eyes were categorised as having resolution (group 1), reduction (group 2), or persistence (group 3) of CMO. Intergroup comparisons were made with regard to preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative parameters. Preoperative and postoperative visual acuities were compared within each group. RESULTS: Of the 27 eyes identified, eight (29.6%) had resolution, 14 (51.8%) had reduction, and five (18.6%) had persistence of CMO. Median preoperative visual acuity was similar in all groups (1.0, 1.0, 1.3, respectively; p = 0.29). Overall median follow up was 12.0 months (Q1 = 12.0, Q2 = 22.5). Eyes in group 1 had significantly better median postoperative visual acuity than eyes in groups 2 and 3 (0.6, 1.0, 2.0 respectively; p = 0.01). A significantly higher proportion of eyes in group 1 had visual acuity improvement compared with eyes in the other groups (87.5% v 35.7% and 20.0%; p = 0.03). Median postoperative visual acuity was significantly better than median preoperative visual acuity in group 1 eyes only (p = 0.02). A higher percentage of group 1 eyes had evidence of postoperative retinal perfusion (83.0% v 21.43% and 40.0%; p = 0.16). Postoperative retinal detachment occurred in three eyes (11.1%). CONCLUSION: Complete resolution of CMO after AV sheathotomy occurred in one third of patients, and postoperative vision improved significantly in this group. However, in the majority of cases, despite an improvement in CMO, there was no improvement in vision after AV sheathotomy.
BACKGROUND:Arteriovenous (AV) sheathotomy, a potential treatment for branch retinal vein occlusion (BVO), surgically separates retinal vessels at an AV crossing. Relief of the aetiological obstruction, with resolution of cystoid macular oedema (CMO), may result in improved visual acuity. METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive cases of AV sheathotomy for BVO was undertaken. Eyes were categorised as having resolution (group 1), reduction (group 2), or persistence (group 3) of CMO. Intergroup comparisons were made with regard to preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative parameters. Preoperative and postoperative visual acuities were compared within each group. RESULTS: Of the 27 eyes identified, eight (29.6%) had resolution, 14 (51.8%) had reduction, and five (18.6%) had persistence of CMO. Median preoperative visual acuity was similar in all groups (1.0, 1.0, 1.3, respectively; p = 0.29). Overall median follow up was 12.0 months (Q1 = 12.0, Q2 = 22.5). Eyes in group 1 had significantly better median postoperative visual acuity than eyes in groups 2 and 3 (0.6, 1.0, 2.0 respectively; p = 0.01). A significantly higher proportion of eyes in group 1 had visual acuity improvement compared with eyes in the other groups (87.5% v 35.7% and 20.0%; p = 0.03). Median postoperative visual acuity was significantly better than median preoperative visual acuity in group 1 eyes only (p = 0.02). A higher percentage of group 1 eyes had evidence of postoperative retinal perfusion (83.0% v 21.43% and 40.0%; p = 0.16). Postoperative retinal detachment occurred in three eyes (11.1%). CONCLUSION: Complete resolution of CMO after AV sheathotomy occurred in one third of patients, and postoperative vision improved significantly in this group. However, in the majority of cases, despite an improvement in CMO, there was no improvement in vision after AV sheathotomy.