Literature DB >> 25863847

Prospective randomized trial: outcomes of SF₆ versus C₃F₈ in macular hole surgery.

Sophie Briand1, Emmanuelle Chalifoux2, Eric Tourville3, Serge Bourgault3, Mathieu Caissie3, Yvon Tardif3, Marcelle Giasson3, Jocelyne Boivin3, Caty Blanchette4, Benoit Cinq-Mars3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare macular hole (MH) closure and visual acuity improvement after vitrectomy using SF6 versus C3F8 gas tamponade. The secondary purposes were to report the cumulative incidence of cataract development at 1 year after MH surgery and the proportion of complications.
DESIGN: Prospective, randomized study. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-one patients were prospectively randomized to the SF6 group and 28 patients to the C3F8 group.
METHODS: Preoperative data included MH minimum diameter, Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), cataract staging, and intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement. Postoperative data included optical coherence tomography confirmation of the closure at 6 weeks and 1 year, and ETDRS BCVA and cataract development/extraction, both 1 year after the MH surgery.
RESULTS: Primary MH closure was achieved in 93.3% in the SF6 group and 92.9% in the C3F8 group. Mean ETDRS BCVA improved by 17.7 letters in the SF6 and 16.9 letters in the C3F8 group. The difference in cumulative incidence of cataract development and extraction between both groups was not statistically significant. Regardless of the dye used, similar results were achieved. Finally, the proportion of adverse events was similar in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: MH surgery with SF6 gas achieves results similar to C3F8 in terms of visual acuity improvement, MH closure, cataract development/extraction, and adverse events.
Copyright © 2015 Canadian Ophthalmological Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25863847     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcjo.2014.12.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0008-4182            Impact factor:   1.882


  14 in total

1.  Treatment of refractory giant macular hole by vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane transplantation and autologous blood.

Authors:  Wen-Juan Lyu; Lei-Bing Ji; Yun Xiao; Yin-Bo Fan; Xue-Hong Cai
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-05-18       Impact factor: 1.779

Review 2.  Literature Review of Surgical Treatment in Idiopathic Full-Thickness Macular Hole.

Authors:  Mantapond Ittarat; Thanapong Somkijrungroj; Sunee Chansangpetch; Pear Pongsachareonnont
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-07-30

3.  Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) versus perfluoropropane (C3F8) tamponade and short term face-down position for macular hole repair: a randomized prospective study.

Authors:  Giamberto Casini; Pasquale Loiudice; Stefano De Cillà; Paolo Radice; Marco Nardi
Journal:  Int J Retina Vitreous       Date:  2016-04-01

Review 4.  A Review of Surgical Outcomes and Advances for Macular Holes.

Authors:  Peng-Peng Zhao; Shuang Wang; Nan Liu; Zhi-Min Shu; Jin-Song Zhao
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-04-18       Impact factor: 1.909

Review 5.  Pathogenesis and Management of Macular Hole: Review of Current Advances.

Authors:  Guzel Bikbova; Toshiyuki Oshitari; Takayuki Baba; Shuichi Yamamoto; Keisuke Mori
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-05-02       Impact factor: 1.909

Review 6.  Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) versus Perfluoropropane (C3F8) in the Intraoperative Management of Macular Holes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Idan Hecht; Michael Mimouni; Eytan Z Blumenthal; Yoreh Barak
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-03-12       Impact factor: 1.909

Review 7.  Optimal management of idiopathic macular holes.

Authors:  Haifa A Madi; Ibrahim Masri; David H Steel
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-01-13

8.  Inverted ILM flap, free ILM flap and conventional ILM peeling for large macular holes.

Authors:  Raul Velez-Montoya; J Abel Ramirez-Estudillo; Carl Sjoholm-Gomez de Liano; Francisco Bejar-Cornejo; Jorge Sanchez-Ramos; Jose Luis Guerrero-Naranjo; Virgilio Morales-Canton; Sergio E Hernandez-Da Mota
Journal:  Int J Retina Vitreous       Date:  2018-02-19

9.  Visual Recovery after Macular Hole Surgery and Related Prognostic Factors.

Authors:  Soo Han Kim; Hong Kyu Kim; Jong Yun Yang; Sung Chul Lee; Sung Soo Kim
Journal:  Korean J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-03-13

10.  Hole diameter ratio for prediction of anatomical outcomes in stage III or IV idiopathic macular holes.

Authors:  Yue Qi; Yanping Yu; Qisheng You; Zengyi Wang; Jing Wang; Wu Liu
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-08-28       Impact factor: 2.209

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.