Hatef Elham, Sena Dayse F, Fallano Katherine A, Crews Jonathan, Do Diana V
Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 600 North Wolfe Street, Wilmer B-43, Baltimore, Maryland, USA, 21287.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 May 7;5(5):CD008350. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008350.pub2.
Rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) is a full-thickness break in the sensory retina, caused by vitreous traction on the retina. While pneumatic retinopexy, scleral buckle, and vitrectomy are the accepted surgical interventions for eyes with RRD, their relative effectiveness has remained controversial.
The objectives of this review were to assess the effectiveness and safety of pneumatic retinopexy versus scleral buckle or pneumatic retinopexy versus a combination treatment of scleral buckle and vitrectomy for people with RRD. The secondary objectives were to summarize any data on economic measures and quality of life.
We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (2014, Issue 12), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to January 2015), EMBASE (January 1980 to January 2015), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (January 1982 to January 2015), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 13 January 2015.
We included all randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of pneumatic retinopexy versus scleral buckle (with or without vitrectomy) for eyes with RRD.
After screening for eligibility, two review authors independently extracted study characteristics, methods, and outcomes. We followed systematic review standards as set forth by The Cochrane Collaboration.
We included two randomized controlled trials (218 eyes of 216 participants) comparing the effectiveness of pneumatic retinopexy versus scleral buckle for eyes with RRD. We identified no studies investigating the comparison of pneumatic retinopexy versus a combination treatment of scleral buckle and vitrectomy. Of the two included studies, one was a small study with 20 participants enrolled in Ireland and followed for an average of 16 months. The second study was larger with 196 participants (198 eyes) enrolled in the United States and followed for at least 6 months. Cautious interpretation of the results is warranted, since we graded the evidence as low to moderate quality due to insufficient reporting of study methods and imprecision and inconsistency among study results.Both studies showed fewer eyes achieving retinal reattachment in the pneumatic retinopexy group compared with the scleral buckle group by six-months follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 1.02, 218 eyes); however, we are uncertain as to whether the intervention has an important effect on reattachment because the results are imprecise. Eyes in the pneumatic retinopexy group also were more likely to have had a recurrence of retinal detachment by six-months follow-up (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.00 to 3.24, 218 eyes); however, we are uncertain as to whether the intervention has an important effect on recurrence because the lower CI equals no difference. Neither study reported mean change in visual acuity, quality of life data, or economic measures. Differences between the pneumatic retinopexy group and scleral buckle group were uncertain due to small numbers of events with respect to operative ocular adverse events (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.42, 218 eyes), development of cataract (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.06 to 14.54, 198 eyes), glaucoma (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.91, 198 eyes), macular pucker (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.20 to 2.67, 198 eyes), and proliferative vitreoretinopathy (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.96, 218 eyes). Fewer eyes in the pneumatic retinopexy group compared with the scleral buckle group experienced choroidal detachment (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.57, 198 eyes) or myopic shift equal to or greater than 1 diopter spherical equivalent (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.13, 198 eyes).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence suggests that pneumatic retinopexy may result in lower rates of reattachment and higher rates of recurrence than scleral buckle for eyes with RRD, but does not rule out no difference between procedures. The relative safety of the procedures is uncertain and the relative effects of these procedures in terms of other patient-important outcomes, such as visual acuity and quality of life, is unknown. Due to the limited information available between pneumatic retinopexy and scleral buckle procedures, future research addressing these evidence gaps are warranted.
孔源性视网膜脱离(RRD)是指感觉层视网膜的全层裂孔,由玻璃体对视网膜的牵拉所致。虽然气体视网膜固定术、巩膜扣带术和玻璃体切除术是公认的RRD患者的手术干预方法,但其相对有效性仍存在争议。
本综述的目的是评估气体视网膜固定术与巩膜扣带术相比,或气体视网膜固定术与巩膜扣带术联合玻璃体切除术相比,对RRD患者的有效性和安全性。次要目的是总结有关经济指标和生活质量的任何数据。
我们检索了CENTRAL(包括Cochrane眼科和视力组试验注册库)(2014年第12期)、Ovid MEDLINE、Ovid MEDLINE在研及其他未索引引文、Ovid MEDLINE每日更新、Ovid OLDMEDLINE(1946年1月至2015年1月)、EMBASE(1980年1月至2015年1月)、拉丁美洲和加勒比健康科学文献数据库(LILACS)(1982年1月至2015年1月)、ISRCTN注册库(www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch)、ClinicalTrials.gov(www.clinicaltrials.gov)以及世界卫生组织(WHO)国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP)(www.who.int/ictrp/search/en)。在电子检索试验时,我们未使用任何日期或语言限制。我们最近一次检索电子数据库是在2015年1月13日。
我们纳入了所有比较气体视网膜固定术与巩膜扣带术(有无玻璃体切除术)对RRD患者有效性的随机或半随机对照试验。
在筛选合格性后,两位综述作者独立提取研究特征、方法和结果。我们遵循Cochrane协作网制定的系统综述标准。
我们纳入了两项随机对照试验(2名参与者的218只眼),比较气体视网膜固定术与巩膜扣带术对RRD患者的有效性。我们未找到研究气体视网膜固定术与巩膜扣带术联合玻璃体切除术比较的研究。在纳入的两项研究中,一项是在爱尔兰进行的小型研究,有20名参与者,平均随访16个月。第二项研究规模较大,在美国有196名参与者(198只眼),随访至少6个月。由于研究方法报告不足以及研究结果的不精确和不一致,我们将证据质量评为低到中等质量,因此对结果的解释需谨慎。两项研究均显示,在6个月的随访中气体视网膜固定术组视网膜复位的眼数少于巩膜扣带术组(风险比(RR)0.89,95%置信区间(CI)0.77至1.02,218只眼);然而,由于结果不精确,我们不确定该干预措施对视网膜复位是否有重要影响。在6个月的随访中,气体视网膜固定术组的眼也更有可能发生视网膜脱离复发(RR 1.80,95%CI 1.00至3.24,218只眼);然而,由于较低的CI等于无差异,我们不确定该干预措施对复发是否有重要影响。两项研究均未报告视力的平均变化、生活质量数据或经济指标。由于手术眼部不良事件(RR 0.67,95%CI 0.32至1.42,218只眼)、白内障发生(RR 0.92,95%CI 0.06至14.54,198只眼)、青光眼(RR 0.31,95%CI 0.03至2.91,198只眼)、黄斑皱襞(RR 0.74,95%CI 0.20至2.67,198只眼)和增殖性玻璃体视网膜病变(RR 0.94,95%CI 0.30至2.96,218只眼)的事件数量较少,气体视网膜固定术组与巩膜扣带术组之间差异不确定。与巩膜扣带术组相比,气体视网膜固定术组发生脉络膜脱离(RR 0.17,95%CI 0.05至0.57,198只眼)或近视性屈光度变化等于或大于1个等效球镜(RR 0.04,95%CI 0.01至0.13,198只眼)的眼数较少。
证据表明,对于RRD患者,气体视网膜固定术可能比巩膜扣带术导致更低的视网膜复位率和更高的复发率,但不排除两种手术方法之间无差异。手术方法的相对安全性不确定,这些手术方法在其他对患者重要的结局(如视力和生活质量)方面的相对影响尚不清楚。由于气体视网膜固定术和巩膜扣带术之间的可用信息有限,有必要开展未来研究以填补这些证据空白。