PURPOSE: To compare the anatomical and functional results achieved with subretinal fluid drainage (SRFD) and perfluorocarbon liquid (PFCL) use in patients with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) treated by primary pars plana vitrectomy (PPV). METHODS: The study included 162 eyes of 162 patients who underwent PPV for RRD, either with PFCL (n = 108) or SRFD (n = 54). The two groups were matched in 2:1 ratio for age, gender, and lens status. Groups were compared for rates of retinal reattachment, visual improvement, and the occurrence of recurrent RRD and any other postoperative complications. RESULTS: Both groups had a single surgery success rate of 90.7%, and 100% of retinas were reattached by the end of follow-up. Both groups had similar final VA (0.30 ± 0.39 logMAR in the SRFD group and 0.35 ± 0.44 in the PFCL group; p = 0.48) and degrees of visual improvement (0.64 ± 0.75 logMAR in the SRFD group and 0.59 ± 0.89 in the PFC group; p = 0.71). Complication rates were also similar between groups. The rate of additional interventions was higher (although not statistically significant) in the PFCL group than the SRFD group, due to cases of PFCL retention (4.6% vs. 1.8%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Both PFCL and SRFD achieved excellent results in terms of retinal reattachment and visual improvement, and have comparable safety profiles. A slightly higher rate of additional surgeries was found in the PFCL group. These findings indicate that PFCL are not necessary in routine PPV for RRD, as they do not improve the results achieved with SRFD and may be less cost-effective due to their higher price and potential for a higher rate of additional surgeries.
PURPOSE: To compare the anatomical and functional results achieved with subretinal fluid drainage (SRFD) and perfluorocarbon liquid (PFCL) use in patients with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) treated by primary pars plana vitrectomy (PPV). METHODS: The study included 162 eyes of 162 patients who underwent PPV for RRD, either with PFCL (n = 108) or SRFD (n = 54). The two groups were matched in 2:1 ratio for age, gender, and lens status. Groups were compared for rates of retinal reattachment, visual improvement, and the occurrence of recurrent RRD and any other postoperative complications. RESULTS: Both groups had a single surgery success rate of 90.7%, and 100% of retinas were reattached by the end of follow-up. Both groups had similar final VA (0.30 ± 0.39 logMAR in the SRFD group and 0.35 ± 0.44 in the PFCL group; p = 0.48) and degrees of visual improvement (0.64 ± 0.75 logMAR in the SRFD group and 0.59 ± 0.89 in the PFC group; p = 0.71). Complication rates were also similar between groups. The rate of additional interventions was higher (although not statistically significant) in the PFCL group than the SRFD group, due to cases of PFCL retention (4.6% vs. 1.8%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Both PFCL and SRFD achieved excellent results in terms of retinal reattachment and visual improvement, and have comparable safety profiles. A slightly higher rate of additional surgeries was found in the PFCL group. These findings indicate that PFCL are not necessary in routine PPV for RRD, as they do not improve the results achieved with SRFD and may be less cost-effective due to their higher price and potential for a higher rate of additional surgeries.
Authors: Stephen G Schwartz; Harry W Flynn; Xue Wang; Ajay E Kuriyan; Samuel A Abariga; Wen-Hsiang Lee Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2020-05-13