PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the best-corrected visual acuity and occurrence of neovascular glaucoma with vitrectomy (VT) and panretinal photocoagulation or without VT in central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) associated with vitreous hemorrhage (VH). METHODS: The charts from patients diagnosed as having CRVO with VH at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital (Taiwan) were reviewed. They were grouped based on whether they also underwent VT. The main outcome measurements were the best-corrected visual acuity and incidence of neovascular glaucoma. RESULTS: There were 83 eyes that had CRVO with VH from 83 patients (VT group, 56 eyes; non-VT group, 27 eyes). There was no significant difference between the VT and non-VT groups in terms of age, gender, diabetes, hypertension, lens status, and follow-up period. The non-VT group had a better best-corrected visual acuity (P = 0.018) and less VH (P = 0.025) than the VT group at baseline; however, the VT group had a better best-corrected visual acuity at the end of the follow-up than the non-VT group (P < 0.001). Most importantly, there was a higher neovascular glaucoma development (37%) in the non-VT group compared with that (14.3%) in the VT group (P = 0.025). CONCLUSION: The visual outcomes of CRVO with VH are unfavorable whether VT was performed. However, VT and panretinal photocoagulation improved visual acuity and reduced the incidence of neovascular glaucoma in CRVO with VH.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the best-corrected visual acuity and occurrence of neovascular glaucoma with vitrectomy (VT) and panretinal photocoagulation or without VT in central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) associated with vitreous hemorrhage (VH). METHODS: The charts from patients diagnosed as having CRVO with VH at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital (Taiwan) were reviewed. They were grouped based on whether they also underwent VT. The main outcome measurements were the best-corrected visual acuity and incidence of neovascular glaucoma. RESULTS: There were 83 eyes that had CRVO with VH from 83 patients (VT group, 56 eyes; non-VT group, 27 eyes). There was no significant difference between the VT and non-VT groups in terms of age, gender, diabetes, hypertension, lens status, and follow-up period. The non-VT group had a better best-corrected visual acuity (P = 0.018) and less VH (P = 0.025) than the VT group at baseline; however, the VT group had a better best-corrected visual acuity at the end of the follow-up than the non-VT group (P < 0.001). Most importantly, there was a higher neovascular glaucoma development (37%) in the non-VT group compared with that (14.3%) in the VT group (P = 0.025). CONCLUSION: The visual outcomes of CRVO with VH are unfavorable whether VT was performed. However, VT and panretinal photocoagulation improved visual acuity and reduced the incidence of neovascular glaucoma in CRVO with VH.