Search

Aim: To examine residual debris within sterilised instruments prior to cataract surgery., Methods: (i) Flushings from 32 sets of phacoemulsification instruments, sterilised according to hospital routine protocols, were taken preoperatively and analysed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). (ii) A total of 16 sets of flushings from a different institute were collected-with separation of samples collected from phacoemulsification and those from irrigation-aspiration (IA) instruments-and analysed in the same way. (iii) A total of 15 sets of flushings were collected from instruments where an automated flushing system was used prior to sterilisation., Results: (i)In the first study, 62% were clean, 16% were moderately contaminated and 22% were severely contaminated. Various contaminants were identified including lens capsule and cells, man-made fibres, squamous cells, bacteria, fungal elements, diatoms, red blood cells and proteinaceous material. (ii) In the second study, the results were similar and contamination of both phacoemulsification and IA instruments was shown. (iii) The third study showed that although a decrease in contamination followed automated flushing, contamination was not completely eliminated., Conclusions: Although all equipment had been sterilised, pyrogenic material was still present. These findings emphasise the importance of meticulous cleaning of all surgical equipment in which biological debris can remain.

Purpose: This national study was designed to audit anatomical outcome and complications relating to primary surgery for rhegmatogenous retinal detachments. This paper presents survey methods, characteristics of participating consultants and the demographic and clinical characteristics of the patient sample., Methods: Two surveys were undertaken. The first identified consultants who at the time performed retinal detachment surgery in the National Health Service. These surgeons formed the sampling frame for a nationwide cross-sectional clinical study that audited the outcomes of primary surgery for rhegmatogenous retinal detachments. Consultants selected patients according to the study eligibility criteria and data were collected by self-administered postal questionnaires. A validation exercise was carried out to examine selection bias and reporting accuracy., Results: Only 256/671 (38%) of UK consultants, who responded to the first survey, indicated that they performed retinal detachment surgery on NHS patients. Annual activity varied between 0 and 400 primary procedures for rhegmatogenous retinal detachments. Seven hundred and sixty-eight eligible patients from 167 consultants were recruited for the clinical study. Twenty per cent of patients had a single retinal break with less than one quadrant of associated detachment and 45% had single or multiple breaks within the same quadrant and/or less than two quadrants of associated retinal detachment. Over 50% patients had single or multiple horseshoe tears. Validation studies suggested that there was no significant bias from the selection of patients or inaccuracy in reporting outcomes., Conclusions: This large unselected group of primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachments provides a representative sample for considering variations in re-attachment rates.

Purpose: This national study was designed to audit anatomical outcome and complications relating to primary surgery for rhegmatogenous retinal detachments. This paper presents success and complication rates, and examines variations in outcome., Methods: Sampling and recruitment details of this nationwide cross-sectional survey of 768 patients of 167 consultant ophthalmologists having their first operation for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment have been described. The main clinical outcomes detailed here are anatomical reattachment at 3 months after surgery and complications related to surgery. Consultants with a declared special interest in retinal surgery and able to perform pars plana vitrectomy were designated specialists for the analyses., Results: Overall reattachment rate with a single procedure was 77% (95% CI 73.9-80.2). There were significant differences in reattachment rates between specialists and non-specialists. Without allowing for case-mix, specialists had a reattachment rate of 82% (95% CI 77.9-85.7) with a single procedure and non-specialists 71% (95% CI 65.9-76.0). Allowing for case-mix, there was a significant difference between specialists and non-specialists for grade 2 detachments of 87% and 70% respectively (P < 0.0001). Analysing detachments by break type, the largest difference between specialists and non-specialists was observed for retinal detachments secondary to horseshoe tears, 80% and 68% respectively (P < 0.003). Specialists met the standards set for primary reattachment rates, while non-specialists did not. Over a third of patients had at least one complication reported at some point during the audit period., Conclusions: Significant differences were seen in reattachment rates between specialists and non-specialists, overall and for specific subgroups of patients. This study provides relevant, robust and valid standards to enable all surgeons to audit their own surgical outcomes for primary retinal detachment repair in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments, identify common categories of failure and aim to improve results.

One hundred consecutive patients who underwent bilateral pan-retinal photocoagulation (PRP) for proliferative diabetic retinopathy were assessed in accordance with the UK Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) guidelines. Visual acuity was documented, and visual fields were assessed using the Esterman test. Among the 30% of patients who failed to reach the visual standards required for a driving licence, three groups were identified: those who failed to attain either the required binocular visual acuity (n = 4), or visual fields (n = 9), or both (n = 17). Previous studies reveal a large variation in DVLA field test failure following PRP treatment for proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Our results show a 19% failure rate solely attributable to treatment, which is at the lower end of previously reported studies (20-80%). The reasons for this discrepancy are discussed. We conclude that modern treatment procedures for proliferative diabetic retinopathy may be undertaken with the knowledge that in the majority of cases a patient's driving licence is unlikely to be revoked.

The visual status of 48 patients with end-stage diabetic nephropathy who were undergoing treatment either by dialysis or transplantation was assessed. At the time of starting dialysis, the vision was good in 27 (56 per cent), impaired in 7 (15 per cent) and of navigating standard only in 12 (25 per cent) while the remaining 2 (4 per cent) had no useful vision. During the time on dialysis and/or following transplantation, vision improved in 6 patients (12 per cent), deteriorated in 9 (19 per cent) and remained unchanged in 33 (69 per cent). Changes in the degree of retinopathy in the 96 eyes resulting either from treatment of the renal failure or laser therapy were noted. The reasons for any changes in vision and the effect of ophthalmic treatment will be discussed.