Abstract
BackgroundTo compare the efficacy of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) at different time points to treat acute retinal necrosis (ARN) and to investigate the necessity of PPV for ARN.MethodsA retrospective review of the treatment options and outcomes of the ARN patients was performed. Thirty ARN patients (34 eyes) were included in this study. The eyes were divided into 3 groups depending on the treatment administered. In the medically treated group, there was no retinal detachment (RD) at the first visit. The routine group patients were treated with systemic antiviral medications, as well as with intravitreal antiviral injections. In the early PPV treatment group, there was no RD at the first visit. The early PPV treatment group patients were treated with systemic antiviral medications and PPV plus silicone oil tamponade and intravitreal injection. In the PPV group, there was RD at the first visit. The PPV group patients were treated with systemic antiviral medications and PPV plus silicone oil tamponade and intravitreal injection.ResultsIn the medically treated group, the mean baseline best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) (logMAR) was 1.38 ± 0.35. The BCVA was 1.21 ± 0.36 at the last visit for the medically treated group. In this group, one eye (12.5%) developed RD after 1 month of treatment. In the early PPV treatment group, the mean BCVA (logMAR) was 1.68 ± 0.26. The BCVA was 1.83 ± 0.21 at the last visit for the early PPV group. In this group, five eyes (29.4%) had recurrent RD before silicone oil removal. In the PPV group, the mean BCVA (logMAR) was 2.0 ± 0.35. The BCVA was 1.72 ± 0.34 at the last visit for the PPV group. In this group, one eye (11.1%) had recurrent RD before silicone oil removal. There were no significant differences among the three groups in the baseline BCVA and the BCVA at the last visit (p>0.05). There were no significant differences between the early PPV group and the PPV group in the recurrent RD rates (p = 0.38).ConclusionsProphylactic PPV showed no difference in recurrent RD rates or better BCVA. Therefore, prophylactic vitrectomy cannot prevent RD nor improve the prognosis of ARN based on our research.
Highlights
To compare the efficacy of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) at different time points to treat acute retinal necrosis (ARN) and to investigate the necessity of PPV for ARN
There were no significant differences between the early PPV group and the PPV group in the recurrent retinal detachment (RD) rates (p = 0.38)
Prophylactic PPV showed no difference in recurrent RD rates or better best corrected visual acuity (BCVA)
Summary
To compare the efficacy of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) at different time points to treat acute retinal necrosis (ARN) and to investigate the necessity of PPV for ARN. Acute retinal necrosis (ARN) was first reported in Japan in 1971 by Urayama [1]. Acute retinal necrosis will eventually result in rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RD). The most recognized treatment regimen of ARN is intravenous acyclovir at 10 mg/kg every 8 h for 7 to 10 days, followed by an oral antiviral medication [3, 5,6,7]. An immediate therapeutic dose in the vitreous body can be achieved by intravitreal antiviral injection, and this therapy has been increasingly adopted. Other adjunctive treatment options, such as laser to prevent RD or systemic
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
