PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy, outcomes, and complications of 23-G and 25-G microincision vitrectomy surgery (MIVS) in cases of diabetic tractional retinal detachment (TRD). METHODS: This is a prospective, single-blinded, randomized, comparative study. Fifty eyes of 50 patients with diabetic TRD involving or threatening macula were randomized into 2 groups of 25 each. Group 1 underwent 23-G MIVS and group 2 underwent 25-G MIVS. Patients were followed up at 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after surgery. The primary outcome measure was anatomic and visual success after surgery. We also compared the 2 alternative MIVS systems and assessed various intraoperative and postoperative parameters. RESULTS:Anatomic achievement was achieved in all eyes and both groups showed a significant improvement in vision after surgery (p = 0.033 and p = 0.004, respectively) and were comparable (p = 0.584). Mean surgical time in 25-G surgery was significantly longer than in 23-G surgery by 4.60 minutes (p<0.001). Postoperative mean astigmatism was comparable in the 2 groups and postoperative hypotony was not encountered in either group. No port-related breaks were seen in either group; however, iatrogenic breaks occurred in 4 eyes in the 23-G group and 5 eyes in the 25-G group (p = 1.000). There was significantly less immediate postoperative pain and foreign body sensation in the 25-G group compared with the 23-G group. CONCLUSIONS: Both 23-G and 25-G MIVS have comparable visual and anatomic results for diabetic TRD; however, 25-G surgery may be associated with less postoperative pain and discomfort than 23-G surgery.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy, outcomes, and complications of 23-G and 25-G microincision vitrectomy surgery (MIVS) in cases of diabetic tractional retinal detachment (TRD). METHODS: This is a prospective, single-blinded, randomized, comparative study. Fifty eyes of 50 patients with diabetic TRD involving or threatening macula were randomized into 2 groups of 25 each. Group 1 underwent 23-G MIVS and group 2 underwent 25-G MIVS. Patients were followed up at 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after surgery. The primary outcome measure was anatomic and visual success after surgery. We also compared the 2 alternative MIVS systems and assessed various intraoperative and postoperative parameters. RESULTS: Anatomic achievement was achieved in all eyes and both groups showed a significant improvement in vision after surgery (p = 0.033 and p = 0.004, respectively) and were comparable (p = 0.584). Mean surgical time in 25-G surgery was significantly longer than in 23-G surgery by 4.60 minutes (p<0.001). Postoperative mean astigmatism was comparable in the 2 groups and postoperative hypotony was not encountered in either group. No port-related breaks were seen in either group; however, iatrogenic breaks occurred in 4 eyes in the 23-G group and 5 eyes in the 25-G group (p = 1.000). There was significantly less immediate postoperative pain and foreign body sensation in the 25-G group compared with the 23-G group. CONCLUSIONS: Both 23-G and 25-G MIVS have comparable visual and anatomic results for diabetic TRD; however, 25-G surgery may be associated with less postoperative pain and discomfort than 23-G surgery.
Authors: Mikel Mikhail; Andre Ali-Ridha; Sarah Chorfi; Michael A Kapusta Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2016-08-02 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Jared T Sokol; Sidney A Schechet; Darin T Rosen; Kevin Ferenchak; Sherif Dawood; Dimitra Skondra Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-08-20 Impact factor: 3.240