TY - JOUR
T1 - Cryotherapy versus Laser Does Not Influence Anatomic Success after Vitrectomy for Primary Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment Repair
T2 - Registry Analysis of 2413 Patients
AU - Galvin, Justin C.
AU - Earnest, Arul
AU - Egwunye, Jacob
AU - Essex, Rohan
AU - Fung, Adrian T.
AU - on behalf of the Australian and New Zealand Society of Retinal Specialists (ANZSRS) Retinal Surgery Registry Group
N1 - Funding Information:
Supported by the Australian and New Zealand Society of Retinal Specialists. The authors have made the following disclosure(s): A.T.F.: Research grant – Ionis Pharmaceuticals; Consulting fees – Bayer, Novartis, Roche, Alcon, Allergan, Ionis Pharmaceuticals; Support – Novartis, Roche; Chair Clinical Standards Committee – Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists; Examiners Committee – Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists; Congress Scientific Committee – Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists. Obtained funding: N/A
Funding Information:
Supported by the Australian and New Zealand Society of Retinal Specialists .
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022
PY - 2022/11
Y1 - 2022/11
N2 - Purpose: To determine whether a difference exists between cryotherapy and endolaser photocoagulation retinopexy in terms of the rates of anatomic success after primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) repair with pars plana vitrectomy (PPV). Design: Registry-based, nonrandomized, observational cohort study. Subjects: Eyes with primary RRD in a binational retinal surgery registry that underwent repair with PPV and had a minimum of 3 months of follow-up. Methods: Cases were recorded prospectively by participating surgeons, and the outcomes were recorded at 3 months. A generalized mixed model approach was used to compare the effect of retinopexy type on the outcomes. Variables known to be associated with retinal surgical success were considered as covariates for the final model. The eyes were divided into 2 groups: Cryo group (receiving cryotherapy as the only form of retinopexy) and Laser group (receiving endolaser as the only form of retinopexy). Main Outcome Measures: The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with stable retinal reattachment without the need for further retinal detachment surgery, assessed 3 months after the surgery. Failure was defined as either retinal redetachment or foveal attachment with long-term silicone oil tamponade at the endpoint. The secondary outcome measured was visual acuity at 3 months compared with baseline measurements. Results: A total of 2413 patients were included, and the overall single-procedure success rate was 85%. There was no statistically significant difference in surgical success between the adjusted proportion of successful reattachment for the Cryo group (87%) and that of successful reattachment for the Laser group (82%) (P = 0.84; odds ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.74–1.46). There was no difference in the mean change in the visual outcomes at 3 months between the groups (adjusted mean change of − 0.48 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR] for the Cryo group vs. − 0.50 logMAR for the Laser group, P = 0.82). Conclusions: The choice of cryotherapy versus endolaser retinopexy was observed to influence neither the anatomic success of PPV for RRD nor the visual acuity outcomes at 3 months after the surgery.
AB - Purpose: To determine whether a difference exists between cryotherapy and endolaser photocoagulation retinopexy in terms of the rates of anatomic success after primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) repair with pars plana vitrectomy (PPV). Design: Registry-based, nonrandomized, observational cohort study. Subjects: Eyes with primary RRD in a binational retinal surgery registry that underwent repair with PPV and had a minimum of 3 months of follow-up. Methods: Cases were recorded prospectively by participating surgeons, and the outcomes were recorded at 3 months. A generalized mixed model approach was used to compare the effect of retinopexy type on the outcomes. Variables known to be associated with retinal surgical success were considered as covariates for the final model. The eyes were divided into 2 groups: Cryo group (receiving cryotherapy as the only form of retinopexy) and Laser group (receiving endolaser as the only form of retinopexy). Main Outcome Measures: The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with stable retinal reattachment without the need for further retinal detachment surgery, assessed 3 months after the surgery. Failure was defined as either retinal redetachment or foveal attachment with long-term silicone oil tamponade at the endpoint. The secondary outcome measured was visual acuity at 3 months compared with baseline measurements. Results: A total of 2413 patients were included, and the overall single-procedure success rate was 85%. There was no statistically significant difference in surgical success between the adjusted proportion of successful reattachment for the Cryo group (87%) and that of successful reattachment for the Laser group (82%) (P = 0.84; odds ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.74–1.46). There was no difference in the mean change in the visual outcomes at 3 months between the groups (adjusted mean change of − 0.48 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR] for the Cryo group vs. − 0.50 logMAR for the Laser group, P = 0.82). Conclusions: The choice of cryotherapy versus endolaser retinopexy was observed to influence neither the anatomic success of PPV for RRD nor the visual acuity outcomes at 3 months after the surgery.
KW - Cryotherapy
KW - Endolaser
KW - Retinopexy
KW - Rhegmatogenous
KW - Vitrectomy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85133751690&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.oret.2022.05.025
DO - 10.1016/j.oret.2022.05.025
M3 - Article
C2 - 35659942
AN - SCOPUS:85133751690
SN - 2468-6530
VL - 6
SP - 985
EP - 991
JO - Ophthalmology Retina
JF - Ophthalmology Retina
IS - 11
ER -