Lorenzo Iuliano1, Erika Kacerik2, Eleonora Corbelli2, Francesco Bandello2, Marco Codenotti2. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Vita-Salute University, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Via Olgettina, 60 20132, Milan, Italy. iuliano.lorenzo@hsr.it. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, Vita-Salute University, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Via Olgettina, 60 20132, Milan, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare two commercially available staining solutions (MembraneBlue Dual® by D.O.R.C., Netherlands, and TWIN by AL.CHI.MI.A. S.R.L., Italy), in terms of intraoperative handling, staining efficacy and safety, in eyes undergoing surgery for idiopathic epiretinal membrane (ERM). METHODS: In this observational cross-sectional study, the performance of the dyes used during the procedure (cohesion, ERM and internal limiting membrane [ILM] staining efficacy) was scored by the surgeon using a customized questionnaire after 10 procedures with each of the two dyes. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central foveal thickness (CFT), blue-light fundus autofluorescence (BAF), and microperimetry-determined retinal sensitivity were reviewed preoperatively and then at 1 and 3 months after surgery. RESULTS: ILM staining efficacy with TWIN was scored 2.89 ± 0.33 by the surgeons, which turned out to be higher than with MembraneBlue Dual® (1.90 ± 0.31, P = 0.0002). The cohesion score was 2.70 ± 0.48 for TWIN and resulted significantly higher than with MembraneBlue Dual® (1.60 ± 0.51, P = 0.0010). BCVA, CFT and retinal sensitivity were similar in the two groups, 1 and 3 months postoperatively (P nonsignificant for all). CONCLUSIONS: Both TWIN and MembraneBlue Dual® dyes showed suitable staining properties and equivalent safety and efficacy profiles, both intra- and postoperatively. The TWIN dye might offer a solution for surgeons who prefer a more cohesive and stable dye.
PURPOSE: To compare two commercially available staining solutions (MembraneBlue Dual® by D.O.R.C., Netherlands, and TWIN by AL.CHI.MI.A. S.R.L., Italy), in terms of intraoperative handling, staining efficacy and safety, in eyes undergoing surgery for idiopathic epiretinal membrane (ERM). METHODS: In this observational cross-sectional study, the performance of the dyes used during the procedure (cohesion, ERM and internal limiting membrane [ILM] staining efficacy) was scored by the surgeon using a customized questionnaire after 10 procedures with each of the two dyes. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central foveal thickness (CFT), blue-light fundus autofluorescence (BAF), and microperimetry-determined retinal sensitivity were reviewed preoperatively and then at 1 and 3 months after surgery. RESULTS: ILM staining efficacy with TWIN was scored 2.89 ± 0.33 by the surgeons, which turned out to be higher than with MembraneBlue Dual® (1.90 ± 0.31, P = 0.0002). The cohesion score was 2.70 ± 0.48 for TWIN and resulted significantly higher than with MembraneBlue Dual® (1.60 ± 0.51, P = 0.0010). BCVA, CFT and retinal sensitivity were similar in the two groups, 1 and 3 months postoperatively (P nonsignificant for all). CONCLUSIONS: Both TWIN and MembraneBlue Dual® dyes showed suitable staining properties and equivalent safety and efficacy profiles, both intra- and postoperatively. The TWIN dye might offer a solution for surgeons who prefer a more cohesive and stable dye.
Entities:
Keywords:
Chromovitrectomy; Conjugated blue dyes; Epiretinal membranes; Staining solution
Authors: Eduardo B Rodrigues; Maurício Maia; Carsten H Meyer; Fernando M Penha; Eduardo Dib; Michel E Farah Journal: Curr Opin Ophthalmol Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 3.761
Authors: Andrea Govetto; Robert A Lalane; David Sarraf; Marta S Figueroa; Jean Pierre Hubschman Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2016-12-18 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Rizwan A Cheema; Gholam A Peyman; Ting Fang; Andrew Jones; Andrew D Lukaris; Kim Lim Journal: Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Date: 2007 Sep-Oct
Authors: Marcin P Czajka; Brooks W McCuen; Thomas J Cummings; Hoang Nguyen; Sandra Stinnett; Fulton Wong Journal: Retina Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 4.256