Search

Purpose: To highlight spontaneous resolution or improvement of myopic retinoschisis (MR) in actively surveilled patients. Methods: Case series of five patients diagnosed with MR who did not undergo pars plana vitrectomy and were carefully monitored by a single retina specialist. Ocular and medical history were reviewed, and clinical characteristics including visual acuity and the status of the MR were monitored with spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SDOCT) at each clinic visit. Results: Five patients were identified to have MR without vitreomacular traction, or macular hole formation. Two patients exhibited spontaneous and complete resolution of MR without surgical intervention over an average observation time of 52.5 months. In these cases, a clinical posterior vitreous detachment was documented preceding the resolution of MR over an average time of 26.5 months. Snellen best-corrected visual acuity in these patients improved (Case 1 from 20/50 to 20/40, Case 2 from 20/30 to 20/25). The remaining three patients were monitored for an average of 52 months and showed improvement of MR via OCT imaging. Snellen best-corrected visual acuity either remained stable or improved from baseline (Case 3 stable at 20/30, Case 4 improved from 20/40 to 20/30, and Case 5 stable at 20/20). Conclusion: These findings suggest that conservative management of MR with observation can be considered especially in patients with challenging comorbidities (such as monocular status), and with a clinically identified posterior vitreous detachment without vitreomacular traction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Newly approved treatments for patients with geographic atrophy are changing the treatment paradigm, highlighting the need for eye care providers (ECPs) to have a set of recommendations on how to best manage GA patients. Here, we outline how to identify various stages of age-related macular degeneration including geographic atrophy (GA) by examining optimal management scenarios implicating various ECPs and reviewing treatment considerations for patients with GA. Early identification of GA will lead to optimal patient outcomes, while a standardized management scenario will reduce clinical burden among ECPs treating patients with GA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/aims To compare risk factors for poor visual outcomes in patients undergoing primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) repair and to develop a scoring system. Methods Analysis of the Primary Retinal detachment Outcomes (PRO) study, a multicentre interventional cohort of consecutive primary RRD surgeries performed in 2015. The main outcome measure was a poor visual outcome (Snellen VA ≤20/200). Results A total of 1178 cases were included. The mean preoperative and postoperative logMARs were 1.1±1.1 (20/250) and 0.5±0.7 (20/63), respectively. Multivariable logistic regression identified preoperative risk factors predictive of poor visual outcomes (≤20/200), including proliferative vitreoretinopathy (PVR) (OR 1.26; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.40), history of antivascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections (1.38; 1.11 to 1.71), >1-week vision loss (1.17; 1.08 to 1.27), ocular comorbidities (1.18; 1.00 to 1.38), poor presenting VA (1.06 per initial logMAR unit; 1.02 to 1.10) and age >70 (1.13; 1.04 to 1.23). The data were split into training (75%) and validation (25%) and a scoring system was developed and validated. The risk for poor visual outcomes was 8% with a total score of 0, 17% with 1, 29% with 2, 47% with 3, and 71% with 4 or higher. Conclusions Independent risk factors were compared for poor visual outcomes after RRD surgery, which included PVR, anti-VEGF injections, vision loss >1 week, ocular comorbidities, presenting VA and older age. The PRO score was developed to provide a scoring system that may be useful in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to report the closure of macular hole without surgery in 7 cases using medical therapies. Methods: The retrospective review of 7 cases of full-thickness macular holes, which closed after medical therapy without surgery. Results: Seven eyes of 7 patients developed full-thickness macular holes, which initially closed on medical therapy without surgery. Six patients were kept on maintenance therapy; 1 recurred and 5 did not develop recurrence. One patient was taken off of maintenance therapy and later developed recurrent macular hole requiring macular hole surgery. Conclusions: Medical therapy to decrease macular edema may facilitate macular hole closure and should be considered, especially for small macular holes with significant edema. Reopening of macular holes may occur after stopping topical maintenance therapy for macular edema, which occurred at 10 weeks and 9 months after maintenance therapy was discontinued or markedly tapered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Cystoid macular edema (CME) following cataract surgery is a well-known entity. Less is known regarding the risk factors of developing CME following repair of rhegmatogenous retinal detachments (RRD). Methods: This was a multi-institutional study of primary RRD surgeries from 1/1/2015 through 12/31/2015. The primary outcome was the development of postoperative CME following RRD surgery. Post-operative optical coherence tomography imaging and 3 months of follow-up following RRD repair were required. Results: There were 1,466 eyes that met the inclusion criteria, and 140 (9.6%) developed postoperative CME following primary RRD repair. On multivariate analysis, the statistically significant metrics were older patient age (OR 1.03 per year, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.05), pre-operative proliferative vitreoretinopathy (PVR, OR 1.74, 95% 1.03 to 2.95), and cataract surgery following RRD repair (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.47 to 3.25). Single surgery success was protective against CME (OR 0.20 (95% CI 0.14–0.30). Seventy-six (9.0%) of the phakic eyes and 60 (9.9%) of the pseudophakic eyes developed post-operative CME. Multivariate analysis showed that cataract surgery following RRD repair (p <.0001) for phakic eyes and older age (p =.0075) for pseudophakic eyes were risk factors. In eyes that underwent successful retinal reattachment with one surgery, post-operative cataract surgery (p =.0005) and pre-operative PVR (p =.0011) were risk factors for CME in this subgroup. Conclusion: CME occurred in nearly 10% of the eyes following RRD repair. The biggest risk factors were recurrent RRD, preexisting PVR, older age, and cataract surgery following RRD repair. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Aims: To identify differences in preoperative characteristics and intraoperative approaches between surgeons with higher versus lower single surgery success rates (SSSR) for repair of rhegmatogenous retinal detachments (RRDs). Methods: This study is a sub‐analysis of subjects who underwent RRD repair in the Primary Retinal Detachment Outcomes (PRO) study, a multi‐institutional, retrospective comparative interventional study. The PRO study examined consecutive primary RRD surgeries from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015. The primary outcome was variations in surgical approach to different types of RRDs with secondary analyses of pre and intraoperative metrics for surgeons with SSSR > 90% compared to those <80% who performed at least 40 operations during the study period. Results: A total of 689 surgeries were included in the analysis. The mean SSSR was 94% for the higher tier and 75% for the lower tier (p < 0.0001). Surgeons with >90% SSSR were more likely to have graduated fellowship more recently (p = 0.0025), use less perfluorocarbon liquid (p < 0.0001), perform less 360 degree laser retinopexy (p < 0.0001), and perform a higher percentage of primary buckles and combined PPV/SB (p < 0.0001). For pseudophakic eyes there was no difference between PPV and PPV/SB use (p = 0.6211). Conclusion: Surgeons with high SSSR typically performed SB as well as combination PPV/SB for more RRDs. Similar numbers of PPV and PPV/SB were performed for pseudophakic eyes, suggesting that the difference in SSSR between the two groups may be related to a combination of preoperative and intraoperative decisions as well as differences in technique. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]