Sinawat Suthasinee, Ratanapakorn Tanapat, Sanguansak Thuss, Prompol Sirinada, Laopaiboon Malinee, Yospaiboon Yosanan
Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Muang District, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand.
Arch Ophthalmol. 2010 Oct;128(10):1243-7. doi: 10.1001/archophthalmol.2010.230.
To evaluate whether air is as effective as perfluoropropane gas in treating rhegmatogenous retinal detachment by pneumatic retinopexy.
In a double-blind, randomized, clinically controlled noninferiority trial, eligible patients were randomized into 2 treatment groups by using block randomization and treated by pneumatic retinopexy using filtered air or perfluoropropane gas.
Retinal reattachment rate and final visual recovery.
One hundred twenty-six patients were recruited. Half (63 patients) were assigned to receive filtered air during pneumatic retinopexy and half received perfluoropropane gas. The single-procedure reattachment rate was higher for the perfluoropropane gas group (73.0%[46 patients]) than for the air group (60.3% [38]), but the difference was not statistically significant (risk difference, -12.7%; 95% confidence interval, -29.0% to 3.6%). The final reattachment rate after additional pneumatic retinopexy and/or surgical procedures was 92.1% (58) in the air group and 96.8% (61) in the perfluoropropane gas group. This result showed an equivalent effect on the final reattachment rate (risk difference, -4.7%; 95% confidence interval, -12.7% to 3.2%). Final visual acuity did not differ significantly between groups.
Pneumatic retinopexy using filtered air is associated with a nonsignificantly lower initial reattachment rate than using perfluoropropane gas but results in an equivalent final reattachment rate and final visual recovery.
Air is an acceptable alternative to perfluoropropane gas when treating rhegmatogenous retinal detachment by pneumatic retinopexy.
clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00120445.
