Internal limiting membrane peel: Does it change the success rate of primary vitrectomy without belt buckle in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments?

Purpose: To compare the anatomic success of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) after internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling at macular area and macular plus peripapillary area versus no peeling in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments (RRD). Methods: A prospective observational study between July 2014 and M...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Prashant K Bawankule, Shilpi H Narnaware, Dhananjay V Raje, Moumita Chakraborty
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2019-01-01
Series:Indian Journal of Ophthalmology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.ijo.in/article.asp?issn=0301-4738;year=2019;volume=67;issue=9;spage=1448;epage=1454;aulast=
id doaj-6a08ff13f98a43c58504d7efea79fec7
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6a08ff13f98a43c58504d7efea79fec72020-11-25T02:29:19ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsIndian Journal of Ophthalmology0301-47381998-36892019-01-016791448145410.4103/ijo.IJO_1685_18Internal limiting membrane peel: Does it change the success rate of primary vitrectomy without belt buckle in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments?Prashant K BawankuleShilpi H NarnawareDhananjay V RajeMoumita ChakrabortyPurpose: To compare the anatomic success of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) after internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling at macular area and macular plus peripapillary area versus no peeling in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments (RRD). Methods: A prospective observational study between July 2014 and March 2017 conducted on 289 eyes of 287 patients with RRD were randomly assigned to three treatment procedures, viz., PPV with no ILM peeling, PPV with macular peeling, and PPV with macular plus peripapillary peeling. Recurrent RD (ReRD) was treated as an event and accordingly the overall primary (PS) and final success (FS) rates were obtained. The risk of ReRD associated with peeling procedures after adjusting for risk factors were obtained using Cox-proportional hazard analysis. Results: The PS percentage for no peel, macular, and macular plus peripapillary procedures were 77.78% (70/90), 82.18% (83/101), and 94.89% (93/98; maximum), respectively, which was statistically significant with a P value of 0.003. The FS percentage for no peel, macular, and macular plus peripapillary were 93.33%, 95.04%, and 100%, respectively, which was significantly different with a P value of 0.048. With reference to no peeling, the adjusted hazard ratio for macular peeling was 0.841 [95% CI: 0.44–1.60] while 0.235 [95% CI: 0.088–0.626] for macular plus peripapillary peeling. Conclusion: The anatomic success rate of PPV with macular plus peripapillary ILM peeling was significantly higher as compared to no peel category. The hazard of ReRD in patients undergoing macular plus peripapillary peel was significantly reduced as compared to no peel procedure.http://www.ijo.in/article.asp?issn=0301-4738;year=2019;volume=67;issue=9;spage=1448;epage=1454;aulast=Cox-regressionhazard ratiomacular peelmacular plus peripapillaryprimary/final success
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Prashant K Bawankule
Shilpi H Narnaware
Dhananjay V Raje
Moumita Chakraborty
spellingShingle Prashant K Bawankule
Shilpi H Narnaware
Dhananjay V Raje
Moumita Chakraborty
Internal limiting membrane peel: Does it change the success rate of primary vitrectomy without belt buckle in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments?
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology
Cox-regression
hazard ratio
macular peel
macular plus peripapillary
primary/final success
author_facet Prashant K Bawankule
Shilpi H Narnaware
Dhananjay V Raje
Moumita Chakraborty
author_sort Prashant K Bawankule
title Internal limiting membrane peel: Does it change the success rate of primary vitrectomy without belt buckle in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments?
title_short Internal limiting membrane peel: Does it change the success rate of primary vitrectomy without belt buckle in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments?
title_full Internal limiting membrane peel: Does it change the success rate of primary vitrectomy without belt buckle in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments?
title_fullStr Internal limiting membrane peel: Does it change the success rate of primary vitrectomy without belt buckle in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments?
title_full_unstemmed Internal limiting membrane peel: Does it change the success rate of primary vitrectomy without belt buckle in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments?
title_sort internal limiting membrane peel: does it change the success rate of primary vitrectomy without belt buckle in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments?
publisher Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
series Indian Journal of Ophthalmology
issn 0301-4738
1998-3689
publishDate 2019-01-01
description Purpose: To compare the anatomic success of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) after internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling at macular area and macular plus peripapillary area versus no peeling in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments (RRD). Methods: A prospective observational study between July 2014 and March 2017 conducted on 289 eyes of 287 patients with RRD were randomly assigned to three treatment procedures, viz., PPV with no ILM peeling, PPV with macular peeling, and PPV with macular plus peripapillary peeling. Recurrent RD (ReRD) was treated as an event and accordingly the overall primary (PS) and final success (FS) rates were obtained. The risk of ReRD associated with peeling procedures after adjusting for risk factors were obtained using Cox-proportional hazard analysis. Results: The PS percentage for no peel, macular, and macular plus peripapillary procedures were 77.78% (70/90), 82.18% (83/101), and 94.89% (93/98; maximum), respectively, which was statistically significant with a P value of 0.003. The FS percentage for no peel, macular, and macular plus peripapillary were 93.33%, 95.04%, and 100%, respectively, which was significantly different with a P value of 0.048. With reference to no peeling, the adjusted hazard ratio for macular peeling was 0.841 [95% CI: 0.44–1.60] while 0.235 [95% CI: 0.088–0.626] for macular plus peripapillary peeling. Conclusion: The anatomic success rate of PPV with macular plus peripapillary ILM peeling was significantly higher as compared to no peel category. The hazard of ReRD in patients undergoing macular plus peripapillary peel was significantly reduced as compared to no peel procedure.
topic Cox-regression
hazard ratio
macular peel
macular plus peripapillary
primary/final success
url http://www.ijo.in/article.asp?issn=0301-4738;year=2019;volume=67;issue=9;spage=1448;epage=1454;aulast=
work_keys_str_mv AT prashantkbawankule internallimitingmembranepeeldoesitchangethesuccessrateofprimaryvitrectomywithoutbeltbuckleinrhegmatogenousretinaldetachments
AT shilpihnarnaware internallimitingmembranepeeldoesitchangethesuccessrateofprimaryvitrectomywithoutbeltbuckleinrhegmatogenousretinaldetachments
AT dhananjayvraje internallimitingmembranepeeldoesitchangethesuccessrateofprimaryvitrectomywithoutbeltbuckleinrhegmatogenousretinaldetachments
AT moumitachakraborty internallimitingmembranepeeldoesitchangethesuccessrateofprimaryvitrectomywithoutbeltbuckleinrhegmatogenousretinaldetachments
_version_ 1724833774430060544