View in EDS

Traitement chirurgical du decollement de retine chez le pseudophaque: comparaison entre la vitrectomie et la compression episclerale. [Surgical treatment of retinal detachment in pseudophakia: comparison between vitrectomy and scleral buckling]

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Traitement chirurgical du decollement de retine chez le pseudophaque: comparaison entre la vitrectomie et la compression episclerale. [Surgical treatment of retinal detachment in pseudophakia: comparison between vitrectomy and scleral buckling]
Authors: Bovey, E. H., Gonvers, M., Sahli, O.
Publication Year: 2025
Collection: Université de Lausanne (UNIL): Serval - Serveur académique lausannois
Subject Terms: Adolescent Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Female Follow-Up Studies Humans Male Middle Aged Pseudophakia/*surgery Recurrence Reoperation Retinal Detachment/*surgery Retinal Perforations/surgery *Scleral Buckling Treatment Outcome *Vitrectomy
Description: OBJECTIVE: For the primary treatment of pseudophakic retinal detachment, vitrectomy could be preferred to episcleral buckle because it does not induce myopia, it clears opacities of the posterior capsule and/or of the vitreous and allows a good visualization of the fundus. This study was determined to compare the anatomic and functional results of vitrectomy and episcleral buckle. METHODS: from 1990 to 1995, 93 pseudophakic eyes were operated on for retinal detachment. 75 eyes were treated with episcleral buckle (group I) and 18 eyes were treated with vitrectomy (group II). In the latter group, 4 eyes had a giant tear, and 4 other eyes had a macular hole associated with high myopia. The anatomic and functional results were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: The retina was reattached with one operation in 67 eyes of group I (89%) and 16 of group II (89%). More than one month after the first operation, the retina redetached in 6 eyes of Group I (8%) and one eye of group II (6%). The causes of failure were a) new or missed retinal tears [Group I: 10 eyes (13%), group II: 3 eyes (17%)] and b) vitreoretinal proliferation (group I: 4 eyes, group II: 0). The number of subsequent reoperations for failures or recurrences was higher in group I than in group II. At the final examination, the retina was attached in 73 eyes of group I (97%) and in 18 eyes of group II (100%). The Kruskal-Wallis test did not detect any difference between the two groups concerning the pre- or postoperative visual acuities. CONCLUSION: Vitrectomy seems as effective as episcleral buckle for the treatment of pseudophakic retinal detachment and offers additional advantages.
Document Type: article in journal/newspaper
Language: unknown
ISSN: 0023-2165
Relation: Klinische Monatsblätter für Augenheilkunde; https://iris.unil.ch/handle/iris/87263; serval:BIB_580CCD03EAC6; 000074317500023; 9677566
DOI: 10.1055/s-2008-1034893
Availability: https://iris.unil.ch/handle/iris/87263
https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1034893
Accession Number: edsbas.C37E540E
Database: BASE
Description
Abstract:OBJECTIVE: For the primary treatment of pseudophakic retinal detachment, vitrectomy could be preferred to episcleral buckle because it does not induce myopia, it clears opacities of the posterior capsule and/or of the vitreous and allows a good visualization of the fundus. This study was determined to compare the anatomic and functional results of vitrectomy and episcleral buckle. METHODS: from 1990 to 1995, 93 pseudophakic eyes were operated on for retinal detachment. 75 eyes were treated with episcleral buckle (group I) and 18 eyes were treated with vitrectomy (group II). In the latter group, 4 eyes had a giant tear, and 4 other eyes had a macular hole associated with high myopia. The anatomic and functional results were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: The retina was reattached with one operation in 67 eyes of group I (89%) and 16 of group II (89%). More than one month after the first operation, the retina redetached in 6 eyes of Group I (8%) and one eye of group II (6%). The causes of failure were a) new or missed retinal tears [Group I: 10 eyes (13%), group II: 3 eyes (17%)] and b) vitreoretinal proliferation (group I: 4 eyes, group II: 0). The number of subsequent reoperations for failures or recurrences was higher in group I than in group II. At the final examination, the retina was attached in 73 eyes of group I (97%) and in 18 eyes of group II (100%). The Kruskal-Wallis test did not detect any difference between the two groups concerning the pre- or postoperative visual acuities. CONCLUSION: Vitrectomy seems as effective as episcleral buckle for the treatment of pseudophakic retinal detachment and offers additional advantages.
ISSN:00232165
DOI:10.1055/s-2008-1034893