Search

Fundus autofluorescence underestimates the risk and extent of retinal displacement as demonstrated with homography of infrared images. Retinal displacement is likely present in almost all eyes following rhegmatogenous retinal detachment repair with vitrectomy.

Purpose To assess the incidence of post-operative outer retinal folds (ORFs) in pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) vs pneumatic retinopexy (PnR) following rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) repair and to determine the association of ORFs with functional outcomes at 1 year. Design Randomized controlled trial Participants Patients with primary macula-off RRD meeting PIVOT trial criteria randomly assigned to PPV vs PnR. Methods Post-hoc analysis of the PIVOT trial. Incidence and quantitative morphological features of ORFs were assessed with en face and cross-sectional OCT at 1 month post-operatively by two masked graders. ETDRS letter score and quantitative metamorphopsia were measured at 1 year. Main Outcome Measures Proportion of patients with ORFs following PPV vs PnR at 1 month post-operatively. Secondary outcomes include the association of ORFs with visual acuity (ETDRS letter score) and metamorphopsia (M-CHARTS) at 12 months post-operatively. Results Eighty-eight of the 176 participants enrolled in PIVOT were macula-off RRD. 94.3% (83/88) of these macula-off eyes had month 1 post-operative OCT scans that were gradable, 93.2% (41/44) in the PPV group and 95.5% (42/44) in the PnR group. The incidence of ORFs formation was 34.1% (14/41) in the PPV group and 14.3% (6/42) in the PnR group (p=0.034). ETDRS letter score at 1 year was 65.7±6.6 letters in patients with ORFs versus 75.1±1.4 letters in those without ORFs (difference=9.4 letters, 95% CI=7.5-11.3, p=0.047). Among patients in the PPV group only, mean ETDRS letter score at 1 year in patients with ORFs was 62.8 ± 24.7 letters compared to 75.4 ± 9.2 letters in patients without ORF formation (difference=12.6 letters, 95% CI=0.05-24.59, p=0.04). Horizontal and vertical metamorphopsia scores were similar in patients with vs without ORFs: horizontal: 0.35 ± 0.12 versus 0.29 ± 0.07 (difference=0.06, 95% CI=0.01-0.11, p=0.69) and vertical: 0.25±0.07 versus 0.29±0.07 (difference=0.04, 95%CI=0-0.08, p=0.60) respectively. There was a negative correlation between the closest distance of the ORFs from the fovea and the vertical metamorphopsia score (r=-0.507, p=0.045). Conclusions There is a greater risk of developing ORFs following PPV compared to PnR for RRD. ORFs at 1 month are associated with significantly worse ETDRS visual acuity letter score at 1 year.

Topic It is unclear whether differences exist in efficacy and safety between combined versus sequentially performed phacoemulsification and pars plana vitrectomy (phaco-PPV). Clinical Relevance This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and incidence of complications between these surgical methods. Methods Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched for articles reporting the efficacy and safety of combined versus sequential phaco-PPV for any indication. The primary outcomes were postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and mean absolute refractive error from target (RET). Secondary outcomes included efficacy outcomes and postoperative complications. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model in all cases. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool for randomized trials and ROBINS-I tool for observational studies. Results Of the 5410 articles identified, 1 randomized controlled trial and 14 comparative studies were included, with 1407 and 951 eyes in the combined and sequential surgery groups, respectively. Mean age was 62.71 ± 6.16 years and 44% (range, 32.1%–70%) of eyes were from men. The mean baseline BCVA was 0.88 ± 0.59 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution units (Snellen equivalent, 20/152). The meta-analysis showed no significance between groups in postoperative mean BCVA (P = 0.76) and mean absolute RET (P = 0.46). The risks of synechiae formation (risk ratio [RR], 2.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.83–4.11; P Discussion No significant differences were found in visual and refractive outcomes between combined and sequential phaco-PPV, whereas differences existed in certain safety outcomes. These conclusions remain preliminary, as most evidence is derived from low- to moderate-quality retrospective studies. Given the variability in outcome reporting and associated heterogeneity, future randomized controlled trials are needed.

The role of topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the reduction of ocular pain after intravitreal injections (IVIs) has been explored. To provide clarity on the evidence for these agents, the present meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was undertaken.No standard of care regimen exists for the management of pain resulting from IVIs.A systematic literature search was conducted on Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central from inception through July 2019. The RCTs that treated patients with a topical NSAID and assessed postprocedural pain were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane guidelines. For all analyses, weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. Random effects models were used for all analyses. The primary analysis analyzed pain on a 0- to 10-point visual analog scale. Literature estimates were categorized into the following postprocedure time point groups: 1 hour or less, 1 to 24 hours (although data were available only at 6 hours), and 24 hours or more. A subgroup analysis stratified studies based on agent and preprocedure versus postprocedure administration.From 241 results, 9 RCTs and 598 eyes were included. A low to medium risk of bias was found across the included studies. The mean pain score on a 0-to-10 visual analog scale was significantly lower after topical NSAID administration relative to control at 1 hour or less after IVI (WMD, -1.01 units; 95% CI, -1.38 to -0.65; P0.001), 6 hours after IVI (WMD, -2.17 units; 95% CI, -2.67 to -1.68; P0.001; threshold met for clinical significance, defined as WMD1.2 units), and more than 24 hours after IVI (WMD, -0.75 units; 95% CI, -1.11 to -0.38; P0.001). A greater effect size was seen with administration of NSAIDs before versus after IVI, as well as topical nepafenac relative to ketorolac or diclofenac.At 6 hours after the procedure, NSAIDs provide a clinically meaningful reduction in pain relative to a control group. The administration of NSAIDs before the procedure, specifically topical nepafenac, was associated with the greatest improvement in pain relative to the control group.