Xin-Yu Zhao1,2, Qing Zhao1,2, Ning-Ning Li3, Li-Hui Meng1,2, Wen-Fei Zhang1,2, Er-Qian Wang1,2, You-Xin Chen4,5. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100730, China. 2. Key Laboratory of Ocular Fundus Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100730, China. 3. Department of Operating Room, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100730, China. 4. Department of Ophthalmology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100730, China. chenyx@pumch.cn. 5. Key Laboratory of Ocular Fundus Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100730, China. chenyx@pumch.cn.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the three-dimensional (3D) heads-up surgery with the traditional microscopic (TM) surgery for various vitreoretinal diseases. METHODS: A medical record review of patients that underwent 3D heads-up or TM vitreoretinal surgeries was performed from May 2020 to October 2021 in this retrospective case-control study. Main outcome measures included surgery-related characteristics, efficacy, safety, and satisfaction feedback from the surgical team. RESULTS: A total of 220 (47.6%) and 242 (52.4%) eyes were included in the 3D and TM groups, respectively. The 3D heads-up system significantly benefits delicate surgical steps, like the epiretinal membrane (ERM) peeling for ERM and internal limiting membrane peeling for idiopathic macular holes (P < 0.05). The 3D heads-up system could facilitate a significantly better visual outcome for pathologic myopic foveoschisis (P = 0.049), while no difference by TM surgery (P = 0.45). For the satisfaction feedback, the 3D heads-up system was rated significantly higher in most subscales and the overall score (P < 0.05). The surgeons' ratings on operating accuracy and the first assistants' rating on operating accuracy and operation cooperation were significantly higher in the TM group than in the 3D group (P < 0.05). Besides that, the 3D heads-up surgery was comparable with TM surgery in the surgery-related characteristics, choice of tamponades, postoperative VA, primary anatomic success, and perioperative complications (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The efficacy and safety of the 3D heads-up surgery were generally comparable to the TM surgery. The 3D heads-up system could significantly benefit delicate surgical steps and achieve better surgical team satisfaction.
PURPOSE: To compare the three-dimensional (3D) heads-up surgery with the traditional microscopic (TM) surgery for various vitreoretinal diseases. METHODS: A medical record review of patients that underwent 3D heads-up or TM vitreoretinal surgeries was performed from May 2020 to October 2021 in this retrospective case-control study. Main outcome measures included surgery-related characteristics, efficacy, safety, and satisfaction feedback from the surgical team. RESULTS: A total of 220 (47.6%) and 242 (52.4%) eyes were included in the 3D and TM groups, respectively. The 3D heads-up system significantly benefits delicate surgical steps, like the epiretinal membrane (ERM) peeling for ERM and internal limiting membrane peeling for idiopathic macular holes (P < 0.05). The 3D heads-up system could facilitate a significantly better visual outcome for pathologic myopic foveoschisis (P = 0.049), while no difference by TM surgery (P = 0.45). For the satisfaction feedback, the 3D heads-up system was rated significantly higher in most subscales and the overall score (P < 0.05). The surgeons' ratings on operating accuracy and the first assistants' rating on operating accuracy and operation cooperation were significantly higher in the TM group than in the 3D group (P < 0.05). Besides that, the 3D heads-up surgery was comparable with TM surgery in the surgery-related characteristics, choice of tamponades, postoperative VA, primary anatomic success, and perioperative complications (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The efficacy and safety of the 3D heads-up surgery were generally comparable to the TM surgery. The 3D heads-up system could significantly benefit delicate surgical steps and achieve better surgical team satisfaction.
Authors: Susan B Bressler; Talat Almukhtar; Anjali Bhorade; Neil M Bressler; Adam R Glassman; Suber S Huang; Lee M Jampol; Judy E Kim; Michele Melia Journal: JAMA Ophthalmol Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 7.389
Authors: Katherine E Talcott; Murtaza K Adam; Kareem Sioufi; Christopher M Aderman; Ferhina S Ali; Phoebe L Mellen; Sunir J Garg; Jason Hsu; Allen C Ho Journal: Ophthalmol Retina Date: 2018-11-07