Aims: To assess variations in the characteristics and management of two series of non-complicated rhegmatogenous retinal detachments (RD) carried out 4 years apart in Spain.
Methods: Prospective, multicentric, non-randomised comparative study. 339 consecutive cases of RD treated in five hospitals were included. Group 1 (G1) (n = 186) included cases operated on from 1999 to 2001; group 2 (G2) (n = 153) included cases from 2004 to 2006. 83 variables related to preoperative characteristics of RD, surgical management and postoperative evolution were recorded. Surgeons were allowed to treat patients following their personal criteria. Differences in preoperative characteristics, rate of vitrectomy and anatomical outcome were studied. Quantitative variables were compared by Mann–Whitney U test and qualitative variables by standard contingency tables. Multivariate analysis was carried out by logistic regression analysis.
Results: G1 showed a significantly longer delay in performing surgery, since the first symptoms appeared (G1: 29 (SD 50) days; G2: 22 (55); p<0.001) and more RD without visible retinal break than G2 (G1: 17.4%; G2: 9.2%; p = 0.028). In G2, cases with multiple retinal breaks (G1: 31.6%; G2: 44.6%) were more frequent (p = 0.022). No significant differences in other preoperative variables were observed. Vitrectomy was performed in 30.1% in G1 and in 78.4% in G2 as a primary surgical approach (p<0.001). Regardless of the characteristics of the RD, the rate of vitrectomy was higher in G2. The reattachment rate was over 94% in both groups (p = 0.833). Pseudophakic RD showed better anatomical outcomes in G2 (G1: 83.9%; G2: 96.4%; p = 0.028).
Conclusion: There is an increasing tendency to treat RD with primary vitrectomy, which is related to neither a higher complexity of cases nor better anatomical results.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Funding: FEDER-CICYT MAT 2004-03484-C02-01,-02. Instituto de Salud Carlos III. The sponsor had not participated in the design of the study.
Competing interests: None.
Ethics approval: Ethics Committee approval was obtained.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.