Abstract
Aim
To compare the anatomical and functional success of primary scleral buckling, performed either alone or in combination with vitrectomy, for primary retinal detachment (RD) in phakic eyes and in eyes had undergone uneventful phacoemulsification and had received posterior chamber lens implantations.
Methods
A total of 243 consecutive patients were included in this retrospective, nonrandomized comparative study. In all, 165 phakic and 78 pseudophakic individuals with primary RD underwent scleral buckling alone or in combination with vitrectomy and were followed up for 6 months. Pre-, intra- and postoperative findings including anatomical success, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), complications, and the development of proliferative vitreoretinopathy (PVR), macular pucker, or secondary cataracts were recorded. Cases requiring more than one surgical intervention were defined having failed, although further surgical intervention might have led to success.
Results
At 6 months after scleral buckling alone, the anatomical success was similar in phakic (88.98%) and pseudophakic (87.65%) eyes (log rank=0.310). The corresponding results after scleral buckling with vitrectomy were 82.13 and 77.63% for phakic and pseudophakic eyes, respectively (log rank=0.799). At 6 months after scleral buckling alone, BCVA was similar in phakic and pseudophakic eyes (0.62±0.30 vs0.70±0.29; P=0.227). Likewise, after scleral buckling with vitrectomy, BCVA did not differ significantly (P=0.322) between phakic (0.34±0.32) and pseudophakic eyes (0.50±0.27).
Conclusion
The anatomical and functional outcome of primary retinal reattachment surgery, involving scleral buckling alone or in combination with vitrectomy, is similar in phakic and pseudophakic eyes.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
Tasman W, Annesley Jr WH . Retinal detachment in prosthetophakia. Arch Ophthalmol 1966; 75: 179–188.
Minihan M, Tanner V, Williamson TH . Primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Br J Ophthalmol 2001; 85: 546–548.
Bradford JD, Wilkinson CP, Fransen SP . Pseudophakic retinal detachments. Retina 1989; 3: 181–186.
Greven CM, Sanders RJ, Brown GC, Annesley WH, Sarin LK, Tasman W . Pseudophakic retinal detachments. Anatomic and visual results. Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 257–262.
Halberstadt M, Brandenburg L, Sans N, Koerner-Stiefbold U, Koerner F, Garweg JG . Analysis of risk factors for the outcome of primary retinal reattachment surgery in phakic and pseudophakic eyes. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 2003; 220: 116–121.
Törnquist R, Bodin L, Törnquist P . Retinal detachment: a study of a population-based patient material in Sweden 1971–1981. IV. Prediction of surgical outcome. Acta Ophthalmol 1988; 66: 637–642.
Törnquist R, Törnquist P . Retinal detachment: a study of a population-based patient material in Sweden 1971–1981. III. Surgical results. Acta Ophthalmol 1988; 66: 630–636.
Lois N, Wong D . Pseudophakic retinal detachment. Surv Ophthalmol 2003; 48: 467–487.
Javitt JC, Vitale S, Canner JK, Krakauer H, McBean AM, Sommer A . National outcomes of cataract extraction I. Retinal detachment after inpatient surgery. Ophthalmology 1991; 98: 895–902.
Kratz RP, Mazzocco TR, Davidson BD . A comparative analysis of anterior chamber, iris supported, capsule-fixated, and posterior chamber intraocular lenses following cataract extraction by phacoemulsification. Ophthalmology 1981; 88: 56–58.
Isernhagen RD, Wilkinson CP . Visual acuity after the repair of pseudophakic retinal detachments involving the macula. Retina 1989; 9: 121–125.
Girard P, Karpouszas I . Pseudophakic retinal detachment: anatomic and visual results. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1995; 233: 324–330.
Ranta P, Kivela T . Functional and anatomic outcome of retinal detachment surgery in pseudophakic eyes. Ophthalmology 2002; 109: 1432–1440.
The Retina Society Terminology Committee. The classification of retinal detachment with proliferative vitreoretinopathy. Ophthalmology 1983; 90: 121–125.
Bovey EH, Gonvers M, Sahli O . Traitement chirurgical du décollement de rétine chez le pseudophaque: comparison entre la vitrectomie et la compression épisclérale. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 1988; 212: 314–317.
Campo RV, Sipperly JO, Sneed SR, Park DW, Dugel PU, Jacobsen J et al. Pars plana vitrectomy without scleral buckle for pseudophakic retinal detachments. Ophthalmology 1999; 106: 1811–1815.
Speicher MA, Fu AD, Martin JP, von Fricken MA . Primary vitrectomy alone for repair of retinal detachments following cataract surgery. Retina 2000; 20: 459–464.
Binkhorst CD . Corneal and retinal complications after cataract extraction. The mechanical aspect of endophthalmodonesis. Ophthalmology 1980; 87: 609–617.
Osterlin S . On the molecular biology of the vitreous body in the aphakic eye. Acta Ophthalmol 1977; 55: 353–361.
Rachal WF, Burton TC . Changing concepts of failures after retinal detachment surgery. Arch Ophthalmol 1979; 97: 480–483.
Heimann H, Hellmich M, Bornfeld N, Bartz-Schmidt KU, Hilgers RD, Foerster MH . Scleral buckling versus primary vitrectomy in rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (SPR Study): design issues and implications. SPR Study Report No. 1. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2001; 239: 567–574.
Bartz-Schmidt KU, Kirchhof B, Heimann K . Primary vitrectomy for pseudophakic retinal detachment. Br J Ophthalmol 1996; 80: 346–349.
Devenyi RG, de Carvalho Nakamura H . Combined scleral buckle and pars plana vitrectomy as primary procedure for pseudophakic retinal detachments. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers 1999; 30: 615–618.
Ho PC, Tolentino FI . Pseudophakic retinal detachment. Surgical success rate with various types of IOLs. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 847–852.
Newmann DR, Burton RL . Primary vitrectomy for pseudophakic and aphakic retinal detachments. Eye 1999; 13: 635–639.
Cousins S, Boniuk I, Okun E, Johnston GP, Arribas NP, Escoffery RF et al. Pseudophakic retinal detachments in the presence of various IOL types. Ophthalmology 1986; 93: 1198–1208.
Hakin KN, Lavin MJ, Leaver PK . Primary vitrectomy for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1993; 231: 344–346.
Kreissig I . Ultrastruktur der Kryopexie—Adhäsionen in der Netzhautchirurgie. Habilitationsschrift. Universität Bonn, 1972, pp 1–172.
Rubin ML . The induction of refractive errors by retinal detachment surgery. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 1976; 73: 452–490.
Smiddy We, Loupe DN, Michels RG, Enger C, Glaser BM, deBustros S . Refractive changes after scleral buckling. Arch Ophthalmol 1989; 107: 1469–1471.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Halberstadt, M., Chatterjee-Sanz, N., Brandenberg, L. et al. Primary retinal reattachment surgery: anatomical and functional outcome in phakic and pseudophakic eyes. Eye 19, 891–898 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.eye.6701687
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.eye.6701687
Keywords
This article is cited by
-
Are all primary retinal detachments the same? Anatomic and functional differences between phakic and pseudophakic patients
International Journal of Retina and Vitreous (2023)
-
A comparison of using digitally assisted vitreoretinal surgery during repair of rhegmatogenous retinal detachments to the conventional analog microscope: A prospective interventional study
International Ophthalmology (2021)
-
Proliferative Vitreoretinopathie (PVR) minimal: „Same same, but different“. Besonderheiten und chirurgische Therapie des PVR-assoziierten Makula-Puckers
Der Ophthalmologe (2021)
-
On eye analyses
Eye (2007)
-
Reply to Dr AD Tsakok
Eye (2007)
