Comparative efficacy of conservative, hyperbaric oxygen, and endovascular retinal surgery approaches in central retinal artery occlusion.

Purpose: To assess and compare the efficacy of three treatment modalities for central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO): conservative therapy, hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT), and endovascular retinal surgery (ERS). Patients and methods: We retrospectively analyzed the cases of CRAO patients treated at the Toyama University Hospital. Their age range was 44–87 years; a balanced gender distribution was observed. The conservative therapy group included 13 eyes (6 males, 7 females, average age 74 years). HBOT group: 11 eyes from 10 patients (5 males, 5 females, average age 70 years). ERS group: 10 eyes (7 males, 3 females, average age 74 years). The treatments were as follows. Conservative group: ocular massage and sublingual nitroglycerin. HBOT: 60-min sessions at 2 atmospheres. ERS: vitrectomy followed by tissue plasminogen activator injection using a 47-ga. microneedle. Visual acuity was assessed using logMAR units, with statistical analyses by paired t-test, Kruskal–Wallis test, and Mann–Whitney U-test with Bonferroni correction. Results: The conservative group showed a slight visual acuity change from 1.96 ± 0.53 to 1.88 ± 0.56 (p = 0.56). The HBOT group exhibited a significant improvement from 1.79 ± 0.80 to 1.28 ± 0.81 (p = 0.007). The ERS group displayed the most substantial improvement, with scores moving from 1.98 ± 0.36 to 0.68 ± 0.49 (p = 0.0000413). The ERS group's outcomes were significantly superior to those of the other groups. Conclusion: These results suggest that while conservative treatment may not be sufficient, both HBOT and endovascular retinal surgery show promise, with the latter demonstrating the most significant improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]