Ma Jinlan, Wang Qing, Niu Haoyu
Department of Ophthalmology, Affiliated Hospital of Qinghai University, No. 29 of Tongren Road, Xining 810000, Qinghai Province, China.
Medical College of Qingha University, No. 16 of Konglun Road, Xining 810000, Qinghai Province, China.
J Ophthalmol. 2020 Aug 18;2020:6149692. doi: 10.1155/2020/6149692. eCollection 2020.
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of 27-gauge (27-G) microincision vitrectomy surgery (MIVS) compared with 25-guage (25-G) MIVS for the treatment of vitreoretinal disease.
A systematic electronic search was conducted in March 2020 in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library. Eligible criteria for including studies were controlled trials comparing 27-G vitrectomy with 25-G vitrectomy in patients with vitreoretinal disease. The main outcomes included operation time; best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in logMAR; postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP); primary anatomical success rate for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) cases and postoperative central macular thickness (CMT) for idiopathic epiretinal membrane (ERM) cases; intraoperative/postoperative complications. Odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) were synthesized under fixed or random effects models.
Eleven studies enrolling 940 eyes were identified. Among those 11 studies, six studies were on the treatment of RRD and five studies were on the treatment of ERM, so subgroup analyses were conducted. The total pooled results indicated that 27-G surgery system had obvious advantages in improving BCVA at six months after the vitrectomy ( = 0.004) and reducing intraoperative/postoperative complications ( = 0.03). However, the mean operation time was significantly longer by three minutes for 27-G compared with 25-G vitrectomy ( = 0.002). In subgroup analyses, for the treatment of ERM cases, 27-G group was associated with less complications and longer operation time. However, for the treatment of RRD cases, 27-G groups and 25-G groups were comparable in operation time, postoperative BCVA, postoperative IOP, and primary anatomical success rate.
This meta-analysis confirmed that 27-G MIVS was an effective and safe surgical system compared with 25-G MIVS for the treatment of RRD and ERM cases, even though 27-G system needs a longer surgical time.
我们进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析,以评估27G微切口玻璃体切除术(MIVS)与25G MIVS治疗玻璃体视网膜疾病的安全性和有效性。
2020年3月在PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆进行了系统的电子检索。纳入研究的合格标准为比较玻璃体视网膜疾病患者27G玻璃体切除术与25G玻璃体切除术的对照试验。主要结局包括手术时间;logMAR视力表中的最佳矫正视力(BCVA);术后眼压(IOP);孔源性视网膜脱离(RRD)病例的原发性解剖成功率和特发性黄斑前膜(ERM)病例的术后中心黄斑厚度(CMT);术中/术后并发症。比值比(OR)和均值差(MD)在固定或随机效应模型下进行合并。
共纳入11项研究,涉及940只眼。在这11项研究中,6项研究是关于RRD的治疗,5项研究是关于ERM的治疗,因此进行了亚组分析。汇总结果表明,27G手术系统在玻璃体切除术后6个月改善BCVA(P = 0.004)和减少术中/术后并发症(P = 0.03)方面具有明显优势。然而,与25G玻璃体切除术相比,27G的平均手术时间显著延长3分钟(P = 0.002)。在亚组分析中,对于ERM病例的治疗,27G组并发症较少且手术时间较长。然而,对于RRD病例的治疗,27G组和25G组在手术时间、术后BCVA、术后IOP和原发性解剖成功率方面相当。
这项荟萃分析证实27G MIVS与25G MIVS相比,是治疗RRD和ERM病例的一种有效且安全的手术系统,尽管27G系统需要更长的手术时间。