To describe the usage of 100% perfluoropropane and subsequent laser retinopexy for the repair of posterior pole retinal detachment in a previously vitrectomised patient with diabetic tractional detachment.
BACKGROUND: Diabetic macular oedema is the leading causes of blindness. Laser photocoagulation reduces the risk of visual loss. However recurrences are common and despite laser treatment, patients with diabetic macular oedema experienced progressive loss of vision. Stabilization of the blood retinal barrier introduces a rationale for intravitreal triamcinolone treatment in diabetic macular oedema. This study is intended to compare the best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and the macular oedema index (MEI) at 3 month of primary treatment for diabetic macular oedema between intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) and laser photocoagulation.
METHODS: This comparative pilot study consists of 40 diabetic patients with diabetic macular oedema. The patients were randomized into two groups using envelope technique sampling procedure. Treatment for diabetic macular oedema was based on the printed envelope technique selected for every patient. Twenty patients were assigned for IVTA group (one injection of IVTA) and another 20 patients for LASER group (one laser session). Main outcome measures were mean BCVA and mean MEI at three months post treatment. The MEI was quantified using Heidelberg Retinal Tomography II.
RESULTS: The mean difference for BCVA at baseline [IVTA: 0.935 (0.223), LASER: 0.795 (0.315)] and at three months post treatment [IVTA: 0.405 (0.224), LASER: 0.525 (0.289)] between IVTA and LASER group was not statistically significant (p = 0.113 and p = 0.151 respectively). The mean difference for MEI at baseline [IVTA: 2.539 (0.914), LASER: 2.139 (0.577)] and at three months post treatment [IVTA: 1.753 (0.614), LASER: 1.711 (0.472)] between IVTA and LASER group was also not statistically significant (p = 0.106 and p = 0.811 respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: IVTA demonstrates good outcome comparable to laser photocoagulation as a primary treatment for diabetic macular oedema at three months post treatment.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN05040192 (http://www.controlled-trial.com).
Vitrectomy surgery in proliferative diabetic retinopathy improves the vision-related quality of life. However, there is lack of data on the duration of maintenance of visual gains post vitrectomy. This study thus aimed to determine the survival time of visual gains and the prognostic factors of vision loss after vitrectomy surgery for complications of proliferative diabetic retinopathy. A retrospective cohort study was conducted in an ophthalmology clinic in Malaysia. We included 134 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus on follow-up after vitrectomy for proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Visual acuity was measured using the log of minimum angle of resolution (LogMar). A gain of ≥0.3 LogMar sustained on two subsequent visits was considered evidence of visual improvement post vitrectomy. Subjects were considered to have vision loss when their post-operative visual acuity subsequently dropped by ≥0.3 LogMar. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to determine the survival time of visual gains. Cox Proportional Hazard regression was used to determine the prognostic factors of vision loss. The median age of patients was 56.00 years (IQR ± 10.00). The median duration of diabetes mellitus was 14.00 years (IQR ± 10.00). Approximately 50% of patients with initial improvement post vitrectomy subsequently experienced vision loss. The survival time, i.e., the median time from surgery until the number of patients with vision loss formed half of the original cohort, was 14.63 months (95% CI: 9.95, 19.32). Ischemic heart disease was a significant prognostic factor of vision loss. Patients with underlying ischemic heart disease (adjusted HR: 1.97, 95% CI: 1.18, 3.33) had a higher risk of vision loss post vitrectomy, after adjusting for other factors. Approximately half the patients with initial visual gains post vitrectomy maintained their vision for at least one year. Ischemic heart disease was a poor prognostic factor for preservation of visual gains post vitrectomy.
Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of topical ketorolac tromethamine 0.5% given pre-emptively a day before, for alleviating pain in patients undergoing panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) treatment. Methods: A controlled single-blinded study was conducted on 33 patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR; severe nonproliferative DR, proliferative DR, or advanced diabetic eye disease) who required PRP treatment in both eyes simultaneously. Each eye of the patients was randomly assigned for ketorolac tromethamine 0.5% eyedrop or placebo. Both eyedrop bottles were randomly labeled. Eyedrops were self-administered by the patients, 4 times a day before the procedure (at 6 am, 12 noon, 6 pm, and 12 midnight) and every 15 min for 1 h (4 times) before the laser. Each patient was subjected to PRP using a Visulas 532s Zeiss device set to spot size 200 μm, time 0.10 s, and ∼600 burns in each eye. The pain score was evaluated immediately after treatment in each eye independently with Scott's visual analog scale (VAS) and the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ). Results: VAS pain score in ketorolac-treated eyes (median 3.0, interquatile range [IQR] ±2.5) was lower than in placebo-treated eyes (median 5.0, IQR ±3.0). Total Pain Rate Index score from MPQ was lower in ketorolac-treated eyes (median 3.0, IQR ±3.0) than in placebo-treated eyes (median 3.0, IQR ±2.5). Both pain score differences are statistically significant with P ˂ 0.05. Conclusion: Topical ketorolac tromethamine 0.5% given pre-emptively a day before is effective in alleviating pain in patients undergoing PRP treatment.