Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2020
A matched case-control study of the clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes of cystoid macular edema complicating phacoemulsification surgery.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sanders Francis W B, Lowin Peta, Gupta Nitin, Roberts Harry W
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To assess the visual outcomes of pseudophakic cystoid macular edema (CME) as compared with age- and copathology-matched control subjects, the costs of treatment and follow-up, and the patient-reported outcomes using the new Cat-patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) 5 questionnaire.
SETTING: West Suffolk Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.
DESIGN: Matched case-control study.
METHODS: Fifty-two eyes of 49 patients developed CME over an 18-month period. Age- and copathology-matched patients were identified from clinical records over the same time period in a 2:1 ratio (90 eyes). Postoperative clinical outcomes were recorded including treatments received, costs of treatments, and patient-reported outcome measures using the Cat-PROM5.
RESULTS: Patients with CME reported a significantly worse outcome from surgery than control subjects. Furthermore, patients with CME had significantly worse visual acuity postoperatively than control subjects (CME: logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution 0.40 ± 0.33, n = 37; control subjects: 0.30 ± 0.33; P < .05) despite there being no difference in preoperative visual acuity. In patients with epiretinal membrane (ERM), notably those with CME had worse patient-reported outcomes than control subjects with ERM, and only 18% received prophylactic corticosteroid injection at surgery compared with 63.6% of control subjects. CME resulted in an excess of 266 outpatient appointments, with 388 weeks of topical therapy, 18 orbital floor injections, 6 intravitreal steroid injections, 5 intravitreal antivascular endothelial growth factor injections, and 1 intravitreal dexamethasone implant with an excess expenditure of £216.81 per case.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients developing CME after cataract surgery had reduced visual acuity at 4 to 6 weeks, patient-reported visual outcomes, and increased number of hospital appointments, treatments, and costs.
SETTING: West Suffolk Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.
DESIGN: Matched case-control study.
METHODS: Fifty-two eyes of 49 patients developed CME over an 18-month period. Age- and copathology-matched patients were identified from clinical records over the same time period in a 2:1 ratio (90 eyes). Postoperative clinical outcomes were recorded including treatments received, costs of treatments, and patient-reported outcome measures using the Cat-PROM5.
RESULTS: Patients with CME reported a significantly worse outcome from surgery than control subjects. Furthermore, patients with CME had significantly worse visual acuity postoperatively than control subjects (CME: logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution 0.40 ± 0.33, n = 37; control subjects: 0.30 ± 0.33; P < .05) despite there being no difference in preoperative visual acuity. In patients with epiretinal membrane (ERM), notably those with CME had worse patient-reported outcomes than control subjects with ERM, and only 18% received prophylactic corticosteroid injection at surgery compared with 63.6% of control subjects. CME resulted in an excess of 266 outpatient appointments, with 388 weeks of topical therapy, 18 orbital floor injections, 6 intravitreal steroid injections, 5 intravitreal antivascular endothelial growth factor injections, and 1 intravitreal dexamethasone implant with an excess expenditure of £216.81 per case.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients developing CME after cataract surgery had reduced visual acuity at 4 to 6 weeks, patient-reported visual outcomes, and increased number of hospital appointments, treatments, and costs.