Scott M Warden1, Shizuo Mukai. 1. Retina Service, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, and Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114-3096, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As conservative treatments for retinoblastoma become more prevalent, there will be a greater number of ocular complications developing in eyes that previously would have been enucleated. Pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) is needed to manage some of these complications. METHODS: The authors evaluated three consecutive cases of PPV in eyes that were successfully treated for retinoblastoma from the Retina Service of the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary (MEEI) performed between 1989 and 2004. A review of the literature to date regarding PPV after treatment for retinoblastoma was also performed. RESULTS: There was no tumor reactivation in the three cases at MEEI. Vision was maintained at light perception in one case, and there was improvement in vision from hand motions to 20/80 and 20/400 to 20/160 in two cases. Twelve of the 24 cases reviewed in the literature were found to have significant complications of recurrent tumor, need for enucleation, and/or systemic metastasis. CONCLUSION: PPV is associated with significant risks in eyes previously treated for retinoblastoma and should be reserved for monocular patients with no other alternative for retaining visual function. Areas that may influence outcome include different treatment modalities and length of time of documented tumor inactivity before PPV.
BACKGROUND: As conservative treatments for retinoblastoma become more prevalent, there will be a greater number of ocular complications developing in eyes that previously would have been enucleated. Pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) is needed to manage some of these complications. METHODS: The authors evaluated three consecutive cases of PPV in eyes that were successfully treated for retinoblastoma from the Retina Service of the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary (MEEI) performed between 1989 and 2004. A review of the literature to date regarding PPV after treatment for retinoblastoma was also performed. RESULTS: There was no tumor reactivation in the three cases at MEEI. Vision was maintained at light perception in one case, and there was improvement in vision from hand motions to 20/80 and 20/400 to 20/160 in two cases. Twelve of the 24 cases reviewed in the literature were found to have significant complications of recurrent tumor, need for enucleation, and/or systemic metastasis. CONCLUSION: PPV is associated with significant risks in eyes previously treated for retinoblastoma and should be reserved for monocular patients with no other alternative for retaining visual function. Areas that may influence outcome include different treatment modalities and length of time of documented tumor inactivity before PPV.