Comparison of Scleral Buckling and Vitrectomy Using Wide Angle Viewing System for Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To compare the surgical results of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) and scleral buckling (SB) using the same vitreoretinal viewing system for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD)

Methods: The study was a retrospective analysis of the medical records of 52 eyes (52 patients) with uncomplicated RRD located in superior quadrants. Eyes with pseudophakia or complications were not included. Thirty-one eyes underwent PPV using a wide-angle viewing system (WAVS) and 21 eyes received SB using the same WAVS combined with a chandelier endoilluminator. The primary anatomical success rate was the main outcome, defined as the proportion of eyes with successful reattachment of the retina.

Results: The primary anatomical success rate was 90.5% in the SB group and 90.3% in the PPV group. Both groups achieved 100% of the final success rate. Although no significant difference was observed between the two groups, temporary intraocular pressure elevation and post-operative cataract formation were more frequent in the PPV group. In patients under the age of 55, post-operative cataract formation was significantly less common in the SB group. (P = .045)

Conclusions: Under the same vitreoretinal visualization techniques, both SB and PPV had similar anatomical success rates. Chandelier‑assistance WAVS may increase the popularity of SB to treat primary RRD, allowing many patients to receive the benefits of SB surgery.

KEYWORDS:

• “Pars plana vitrectomy”
• “Scleral buckling”
• “Wide-angle viewing system” and “Chandelier assistance WAVS”

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors indicated no financial support or conflicts of interest.

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

The authors indicated conflicts of interest.

ETHICAL APPROVAL

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

INFORMED CONSENT

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Funding

The authors indicated no financial support.