Wojciech Lubiński1,2, Wojciech Gosławski3, Karolina Podborączyńska-Jodko3, Maciej Mularczyk4, Michał Post3. 1. 2nd Department of Ophthalmology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland. lubinski@pro.onet.pl. 2. II Klinika Okulistyki, Pomorski Uniwersytet Medyczny, ul. Powstańców Wlkp. 72, 70-111, Szczecin, Poland. lubinski@pro.onet.pl. 3. 2nd Department of Ophthalmology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland. 4. Chair and Department of Human and Clinical Anatomy, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the 27G versus 25G vitrectomy in patients with epiretinal membrane (ERM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty pseudophakic eyes of 60 consecutive patients treated by pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) using 27G (30 eyes) or 25G (30 eyes) were prospectively evaluated including eye's inflammation, surgery time, ERM + ILM removal time and complications. Additionally, 1, 3, 7, 14, 30, 90 and 180 days after PPV, the following were estimated: intraocular pressure (IOP), sclerotomy wound closure time, distance best corrected visual acuity (DBCVA), foveal macular thickness (FMT) and surgically induced astigmatism (SIA). RESULTS: The eye's inflammation resolved within 30 days after surgery in both groups. The surgery and ERM + ILM times were longer in the 27G group (p ≤ 0.02). The most common postoperative complication was hypotony in both groups, more common in 25G group (23.3% vs. 10% of eyes). In 27G group, the mean IOP prior to 180 days postoperatively was higher (p < 0.05) and the sclerotomy wound closure time was shorter (p < 0.001). Mean DBCVA values (7, 14, 30 days after surgery) were significantly better in 27G group (p < 0.001). The mean FMT values were similarly and significantly reduced in both groups 1 day postoperatively (p < 0.05) as compared to preoperative values and then stabilized during follow-up. Mean SIA was lower in 27G group 30, 90 and 180 days after surgery (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The use of 27G PPV in patients with ERM significantly reduced sclerotomy wound closure time and surgically induced astigmatism, better stabilized intraocular pressure and allowed to achieve faster visual acuity improvement, as compared to 25G PPV.
PURPOSE: To compare the 27G versus 25G vitrectomy in patients with epiretinal membrane (ERM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty pseudophakic eyes of 60 consecutive patients treated by pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) using 27G (30 eyes) or 25G (30 eyes) were prospectively evaluated including eye's inflammation, surgery time, ERM + ILM removal time and complications. Additionally, 1, 3, 7, 14, 30, 90 and 180 days after PPV, the following were estimated: intraocular pressure (IOP), sclerotomy wound closure time, distance best corrected visual acuity (DBCVA), foveal macular thickness (FMT) and surgically induced astigmatism (SIA). RESULTS: The eye's inflammation resolved within 30 days after surgery in both groups. The surgery and ERM + ILM times were longer in the 27G group (p ≤ 0.02). The most common postoperative complication was hypotony in both groups, more common in 25G group (23.3% vs. 10% of eyes). In 27G group, the mean IOP prior to 180 days postoperatively was higher (p < 0.05) and the sclerotomy wound closure time was shorter (p < 0.001). Mean DBCVA values (7, 14, 30 days after surgery) were significantly better in 27G group (p < 0.001). The mean FMT values were similarly and significantly reduced in both groups 1 day postoperatively (p < 0.05) as compared to preoperative values and then stabilized during follow-up. Mean SIA was lower in 27G group 30, 90 and 180 days after surgery (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The use of 27G PPV in patients with ERM significantly reduced sclerotomy wound closure time and surgically induced astigmatism, better stabilized intraocular pressure and allowed to achieve faster visual acuity improvement, as compared to 25G PPV.
Entities:
Keywords:
25-gauge; 27-gauge; Complications; Epiretinal membrane; Intraocular pressure; Pars plana vitrectomy; Self-sealing sclerotomy time; Surgery time; Visual acuity
Authors: M Ali Khan; Abtin Shahlaee; Brian Toussaint; Jason Hsu; Arunan Sivalingam; Pravin U Dugel; Rohit R Lakhanpal; Christopher D Riemann; Maria H Berrocal; Carl D Regillo; Allen C Ho Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2015-09-28 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Lorenzo Iuliano; Erika Kacerik; Eleonora Corbelli; Francesco Bandello; Marco Codenotti Journal: Int Ophthalmol Date: 2021-01-03 Impact factor: 2.031