Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Share this article on:

RETINAL BREAKS IN VITRECTOMY FOR RETAINED LENS FRAGMENTS

Tan, H. Stevie MD, PhD; Mura, Marco MD; Oberstein, Sarit Y. Lesnik MD, PhD; Bijl, Heico M. MD

doi: 10.1097/IAE.0b013e3182576d46
Original Study

Purpose: To describe the incidence and outcome of retinal breaks in vitrectomy for retained lens fragments.

Methods: This is a retrospective noncomparative interventional case series. Medical records of consecutive cases of vitrectomy for retained lens fragments over a period of 4 years were reviewed. Main outcome measures were incidence of breaks, visual acuity outcome, and occurrence of postoperative complications.

Results: We included 89 consecutive cases in 89 patients. The median interval between cataract surgery and vitrectomy was 2 days (range, 0–106 days). Visual acuity at last follow-up was ≥0.5 in 70% of cases. During surgery, retinal breaks were found in 29% of cases. Induction of a posterior vitreous detachment, the use of a fragmatome, or delay between cataract surgery and vitrectomy did not influence retinal break incidence. Postoperative retinal detachment occurred in only 2% of cases. Other complications were intraoperative choroidal hemorrhage in 1 case, postoperative macular pucker in 2, postoperative macular edema in 1, and glaucoma in 2 cases.

Conclusion: We identified a high number of retinal breaks during vitrectomy for retained lens fragments. Prophylactic treatment of breaks and other areas of retinal traction seem to reduce the risk of postoperative retinal detachment.

We describe the results of vitrectomy for retained lens fragments after phacoemulsification of 89 consecutive cases. Retinal breaks were identified intraoperatively in 29% of cases. Prophylactic treatment of breaks and other areas of retinal traction seem to reduce the risk of postoperative retinal detachment.

Department of Ophthalmology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Reprint requests: H. Stevie Tan, MD, PhD, Department of Ophthalmology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, P.O. Box 22660, 1100 DD Amsterdam, The Netherlands; e-mail: h.tan@amc.uva.nl

The authors have no funding or conflicts of interest.

© The Ophthalmic Communications Society, Inc.