Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

An analysis of the outcomes for patients with failed primary vitrectomy for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment

  • Retinal Disorders
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Our aim was to identify the timing of retinal redetachments and the prognosis for affected patients.

Methods

Retrospective review of electronic patient records and casenotes from two centres. Inclusion criteria were failed primary vitrectomy for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment during a 12-year period. Failure was defined as re- or persistent detachment of the retina prior to a further procedure or at final follow-up.

Results

The records of 133 cases of failed primary PPV for RRD were analysed. The mean age at time of primary surgery was 62.9 years, and mean follow-up was over 3 years from the date of primary surgery. In 72.9 % of cases, the redetachment was diagnosed within 2 months of the primary surgery. Eighty-five percent were diagnosed within 3 months, 89.5 % within 4 months, and 97.7 % within 6 months.

For patients in whom the primary surgery had failed, the rates of attached retina at final follow-up were 80.5 %, or 68.8 % if PVR B/C were present at the time of primary surgery. The final follow-up success rates (attached retina with no tamponade) were 66.2 % for all patients, and 59.4 % for the subset with PVR B/C at the time of primary surgery respectively. Of the total, 33.8 % had one further vitreoretinal procedure, 30.8 % two more, 25.6 % three more, and 5.3 % had four or more. Visual outcome was better with final success (attached retina and no tamponade, p < 0.0001) and worse with PVR B/C evident on diagnosis of failed primary surgery (p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

A short duration of follow-up can over-estimate surgeon success rates for retinal detachment repair. For patients in whom primary surgery has failed, the prognosis for ultimate success is markedly lower than for primary surgery, and most patients require two or more further procedures to achieve this.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mitry D, Charteris DG, Yorston D, Siddiqui MA, Campbell H, Murphy AL, Fleck BW, Wright AF, Singh J (2010) The epidemiology and socioeconomic associations of retinal detachment in Scotland: a two-year prospective population-based study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 51:4963–4968

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Go SL, Hoyng CB, Klaver CC (2005) Genetic risk of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment: a familial aggregation study. Arch Ophthalmol 123:1237–1241

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Williamson TH, Shunmugam M, Lee E (2014) Characteristics of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment and their relationship to success rates of surgery. Retina [published online ahead of print 29 Jan 2014]

  4. Day S, Grossman DS, Mruthyunjaya P, Sloan FA, Lee PP (2010) One-year outcomes after retinal detachment surgery among medicare beneficiaries. Am J Ophthalmol 150:338–345

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Mitry D, Awan MA, Borooah S, Siddiqui MA, Brogan K, Fleck BW, Wright A, Campbell H, Singh J, Charteris DG, Yorston D (2012) Surgical outcome and risk stratification for primary retinal detachment repair: results from the Scottish Retinal Detachment study. Br J Ophthalmol 96:730–734

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Minihan M, Tanner V, Williamson TH (2001) Primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment: 20 years of change. Br J Ophthalmol 85:546–548

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Campo RV, Sipperley JO, Sneed SR, Park DW, Dugel PU, Jacobsen J, Flindall RJ (1999) Pars plana vitrectomy without scleral buckle for pseudophakic retinal detachments. Ophthalmology 106:1811–1815

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Brazitikos PD, Androudi S, Christen WG, Stangos NT (2005) Primary pars plana vitrectomy versus scleral buckle surgery for the treatment of pseudophakic retinal detachment: a randomized clinical trial. Retina 25:957–964

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wickham L, Ho-Yen GO, Bunce C, Wong D, Charteris DG (2011) Surgical failure following primary retinal detachment surgery by vitrectomy: risk factors and functional outcomes. Br J Ophthalmol 95:1234–1238

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Heimann H, Bartz-Schmidt KU, Bornfeld N, Weiss C, Hilgers RD, Foerster MH (2007) Scleral buckling versus primary vitrectomy in rhegmatogenous retinal detachment: a prospective randomized multicenter clinical study. Ophthalmology 114:2142–2154

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wickham L, Bunce C, Wong D (2011) Charteris DG. Retinal detachment repair by vitrectomy: simplified formulae to estimate the risk of failure. Br J Ophthalmol 95:1239–1244

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Foster RE, Meyers SM (2002) Recurrent retinal detachment more than 1 year after reattachment. Ophthalmology 109:1821–1827

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cole CJ, Charteris DG (2009) Cataract extraction after retinal detachment repair by vitrectomy: visual outcome and complications. Eye (Lond) 23:1377–1381

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Benson WE (1988) Retinal Detachment. Diagnosis and management. J.B.Lippincott, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  15. Jackson TL, Donachie PH, Sallam A, Sparrow JM, Johnston RL (2013) United Kingdom National Ophthalmology Database Study of Vitreoretinal Surgery: Report 3, Retinal detachment. Ophthalmology [Epub ahead of print]

  16. Mansouri A, Almony A, Shah GK, Blinder KJ, Sharma S (2010) Recurrent retinal detachment: does initial treatment matter? Br J Ophthalmol 94:1344–1347

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Richardson EC, Verma S, Green WT, Woon H, Chignell AH (2000) Primary vitrectomy for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment: an analysis of failure. Eur J Ophthalmol 10:160–166

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Holladay JT (1997) Proper method for calculating average visual acuity. J Refract Surg 13:388–391

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Machemer R, Aaberg TM, Freeman HM, Irvine AR, Lean JS, Michels RM (1991) An updated classification of retinal detachment with proliferative vitreoretinopathy. Am J Ophthalmol 112:159–165

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sethi CS, Lewis GP, Fisher SK, Leitner WP, Mann DL, Luthert PJ, Charteris DG (2005) Glial remodeling and neural plasticity in human retinal detachment with proliferative vitreoretinopathy. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 46:329–342

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Newsom RS, Johnston R, Sullivan PM, Aylward GB, Holder GE, Gregor ZJ (2004) Sudden visual loss after removal of silicone oil. Retina 24:871–877

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Herbert EN, Laidlaw DA, Williamson TH, Habib M, Steel D (2005) Loss of vision once silicone oil has been removed. Retina 25:808–809

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mitry D, Singh J, Yorston D, Siddiqui MA, Wright A, Fleck BW, Campbell H, Charteris DG (2011) The predisposing pathology and clinical characteristics in the Scottish retinal detachment study. Ophthalmology 118:1429–1434

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rush RB, Simunovic MP, Sheth S, Kratz A, Hunyor AP (2013) Pars plana vitrectomy versus combined pars plana vitrectomy-scleral buckle for secondary repair of retinal detachment. Ophthal Surg Lasers Imaging Retina 44:374–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mendrinos E, ng-Burgener NP, Stangos AN, Sommerhalder J, Pournaras CJ (2008) Primary vitrectomy without scleral buckling for pseudophakic rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Am J Ophthalmol 145:1063–1070

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sharma T, Badrinath SS, Mukesh BN, Gopal L, Shanmugam MP, Bhende P, Bhende M, Shetty NS, Agrawal R (1997) A multivariate analysis of anatomic success of recurrent retinal detachment treated with pneumatic retinopexy. Ophthalmology 104:2014–2017

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Financial Interests

There are no financial interests to declare or funding bodies for this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. St Thomas’ Hospital, Lambeth Palace Road, London, UK, SE1 7EH

    Edward Lee, Zine El Housseini & Tom H. Williamson

  2. Sunderland Eye Infirmary, Queen Alexandra Road, Sunderland, SR2 9HP, UK

    D. H. W. Steel

Authors
  1. Edward Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zine El Housseini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. D. H. W. Steel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tom H. Williamson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Edward Lee.

Additional information

The authors have full control of all primary data, and agree to allow Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology to review data upon request.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lee, E., El Housseini, Z., Steel, D.H.W. et al. An analysis of the outcomes for patients with failed primary vitrectomy for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 252, 1711–1716 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-014-2610-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-014-2610-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation