PURPOSE: To assess the yearly incidence of vitrectomy for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) over an 11-year period, in a geographically defined part of North East England. The time period covered the introduction of diabetic retinopathy screening. METHODS: All patients undergoing vitrectomy for diabetic retinopathy in the Sunderland and South Tyneside area were recorded from 2000 to 2010. Incidence rates of vitrectomy specifically for the complications of PDR for the observed diabetic population, the estimated diabetic population and the population with known PDR were calculated. RESULTS: There was a gradual and significant decline in the vitrectomy rate from 157 (95% confidence interval, CI, 135-187) to 103 (95% CI 98-109) per 100,000 of the observed diabetic population in 2000 and 2010 respectively. The rate in the estimated diabetic population showed no significant change at 68 (95% CI 48-87) in 2002 and 77 (95% CI 55-103) in 2010. The rate in the PDR population, which comprised 2.4% of the known diabetic population in 2002 and 1.8% in 2010, declined significantly from 7.7% in 2002 to 5.7% in 2010. CONCLUSION: This study evaluated vitrectomy rates for PDR in an area of North East England. There were apparent declining rates of vitrectomy for PDR following the introduction of diabetic retinopathy screening but these have to be interpreted in the light of several confounding factors.
PURPOSE: To assess the yearly incidence of vitrectomy for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) over an 11-year period, in a geographically defined part of North East England. The time period covered the introduction of diabetic retinopathy screening. METHODS: All patients undergoing vitrectomy for diabetic retinopathy in the Sunderland and South Tyneside area were recorded from 2000 to 2010. Incidence rates of vitrectomy specifically for the complications of PDR for the observed diabetic population, the estimated diabetic population and the population with known PDR were calculated. RESULTS: There was a gradual and significant decline in the vitrectomy rate from 157 (95% confidence interval, CI, 135-187) to 103 (95% CI 98-109) per 100,000 of the observed diabetic population in 2000 and 2010 respectively. The rate in the estimated diabetic population showed no significant change at 68 (95% CI 48-87) in 2002 and 77 (95% CI 55-103) in 2010. The rate in the PDR population, which comprised 2.4% of the known diabetic population in 2002 and 1.8% in 2010, declined significantly from 7.7% in 2002 to 5.7% in 2010. CONCLUSION: This study evaluated vitrectomy rates for PDR in an area of North East England. There were apparent declining rates of vitrectomy for PDR following the introduction of diabetic retinopathy screening but these have to be interpreted in the light of several confounding factors.
Authors: Vivian Schreur; Jody Brouwers; Ramon A C Van Huet; Sandra Smeets; Milan Phan; Carel B Hoyng; Eiko K de Jong; B Jeroen Klevering Journal: Acta Ophthalmol Date: 2020-07-09 Impact factor: 3.761