Indian Journal of Ophthalmology (Jan 2021)

Pneumoretinopexy versus scleral buckling in retinal detachments with superior breaks: A comparative analysis of outcome and cost

  • Arshi Singh,
  • Umesh Chandra Behera

DOI
https://doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_1574_20
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 69, no. 2
pp. 314 – 318

Abstract

Read online

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to study single surgery reattachment rate, refractive shift, surgical time, cost, and complications of pneumoretinopexy (PR) compared to scleral buckling (SB) in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments (RRDs) with superior breaks. Methods: Data of RRD with superior breaks, from 2013 through 2016, treated either with PR or SB surgery at a tertiary eye-care center were retrospectively reviewed. Treatment outcomes, procedural costs, refractive shift, surgical time, and complications, namely, cataract and glaucoma, were analyzed. Results: Thirty-two cases treated by PR (n = 15) and SB surgery (n = 17) fulfilled the selection criteria. Macula off RRD (91%) was the commonest presentation. Baseline parameters like duration of vision loss, presenting vision, and ocular characteristics were comparable. Single surgery retinal reattachment (66.7% PR vs. 76.5% SB) was analogous (P = 0.698). Retinal reattachment with secondary intervention was achieved in all cases at the last follow-up. Average vision gain in logMAR of 0.8 in PR and 0.6 in SB was not significantly different (P = 0.645) between the two groups, with SB group having a 1.9 Dioptre myopic shift and PR group none. Surgical time was shorter in PR versus SB at 15 versus 85 min and surgical cost (including additional surgery) was 50% less in PR. Complications like cataract progression (P > 0.99) and glaucoma (P = 0.71) were analogous among the groups. Horse-shoe tears were associated with failed primary surgery in 60% of PR and 75% of SB procedures. Conclusion: In RRDs secondary to superior breaks, PR proved to be faster, more economical, and less tissue manipulative than scleral buckle surgery, with equivalent efficacy and safety profile.

Keywords