Frontiers in medicine · 2022
A Comparison of Face-Down Positioning and Adjustable Positioning After Pars Plana Vitrectomy for Macular Hole Retinal Detachment in High Myopia.
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.
Gao Yan, Ruan Ting, Chen Nan, Yu Bin, Xing Xiaoli, Du Qing, Qi Yan, Li Jun
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the anatomical and functional outcomes of macular hole retinal detachment (MHRD) in high myopia after pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with face-down positioning and adjustable positioning.
METHODS: Fifty-three eyes from 53 patients with MHRD were analyzed in this study. All patients received PPV with silicon oil for tamponade and then subdivided into 2 groups: 28 were included in a face-down positioning group and 25 were included in the adjustable positioning group. Patients were followed up for at least 6 months. The main outcome was the rate of anatomical macular hole (MH) closure and retinal reattachment. Secondary outcome measures were the best-corrected visual acuity and postoperative complications.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the rate of MH closure (53.6 vs. 72.0%, p = 0.167) and retinal reattachment (100 vs. 96%, p = 0.472) between the face-down group and adjustable group. Compared with the mean preoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), the mean postoperative BCVA at the 6-month follow-up improved significantly in both groups (p = 0, both). But there was no significant difference in the mean postoperative BCVA (p = 0.102) and mean BCVA improvement (p = 0.554) at 6 months after surgery between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the high intraocular pressure (IOP) after surgery between the two groups (53.6 vs. 44%, p = 0.487). There were no other complications that occurred during the follow-up.
CONCLUSION: Adjustable positioning after PPV with silicon oil tamponade for MHRD repair is effective and safe. Face-down positioning does not seem to be necessary for all patients with MHRD.
METHODS: Fifty-three eyes from 53 patients with MHRD were analyzed in this study. All patients received PPV with silicon oil for tamponade and then subdivided into 2 groups: 28 were included in a face-down positioning group and 25 were included in the adjustable positioning group. Patients were followed up for at least 6 months. The main outcome was the rate of anatomical macular hole (MH) closure and retinal reattachment. Secondary outcome measures were the best-corrected visual acuity and postoperative complications.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the rate of MH closure (53.6 vs. 72.0%, p = 0.167) and retinal reattachment (100 vs. 96%, p = 0.472) between the face-down group and adjustable group. Compared with the mean preoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), the mean postoperative BCVA at the 6-month follow-up improved significantly in both groups (p = 0, both). But there was no significant difference in the mean postoperative BCVA (p = 0.102) and mean BCVA improvement (p = 0.554) at 6 months after surgery between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the high intraocular pressure (IOP) after surgery between the two groups (53.6 vs. 44%, p = 0.487). There were no other complications that occurred during the follow-up.
CONCLUSION: Adjustable positioning after PPV with silicon oil tamponade for MHRD repair is effective and safe. Face-down positioning does not seem to be necessary for all patients with MHRD.