Aim: This study aimed to assess and compare the functional and anatomical results of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) alone versus PPV combined with scleral buckling (SB), and lens-sparing versus phaco-procedures for treat...Aim: This study aimed to assess and compare the functional and anatomical results of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) alone versus PPV combined with scleral buckling (SB), and lens-sparing versus phaco-procedures for treating rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed using the Web of Science, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to retrieve comparative studies. The main objective was to assess the BCVA, while reattachment rates and ocular adverse events were considered secondary measures. Rev Manager software was used for statistical analysis. Results: The literature search identified 10 articles comprising 1518 eyes, with 682 eyes in the PPV group, 193 eyes in the lens-sparing versus phaco-procedure group, and 643 eyes in the combined PPV and SB surgery group. Quality assessment revealed a low risk of bias in most domains. The meta-analysis results revealed a significant difference in postoperative BCVA between the PPV and PPV combined with SB groups (WMD = −0.17, 95% CI [0.27, 0.07], p = 0.001). The primary reattachment rates were 82.80% for PPV alone and 87.52% for PPV combined with SB (p = 0.34). The final reattachment rates did not differ significantly between PPV and PPV combined with SB (99% vs. 99.8%;RR = 1.00, 95% CI [1.01, 0.99], p = 0.96). PPV alone demonstrated a significantly reduced risk of macular edema compared to PPV combined with scleral buckling (9.9% vs. 23%;p = 0.006). The incidences of macular hole development (p = 0.46), recurrent retinal detachment (p = 0.27), proliferative vitreoretinopathy development (p = 0.48), epiretinal membrane proliferation (p = 0.77), and limited choroidal hemorrhage (p = 0.69) were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusions: These findings suggest that PPV alone may be a more effective treatment option in terms of visual acuity (VA) improvement, lower risk of macular edema and cataract development. However, there was no significant difference in VA improvement or complication rates between the lens-sparing and phaco-procedure groups. .展开更多
文摘Aim: This study aimed to assess and compare the functional and anatomical results of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) alone versus PPV combined with scleral buckling (SB), and lens-sparing versus phaco-procedures for treating rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed using the Web of Science, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to retrieve comparative studies. The main objective was to assess the BCVA, while reattachment rates and ocular adverse events were considered secondary measures. Rev Manager software was used for statistical analysis. Results: The literature search identified 10 articles comprising 1518 eyes, with 682 eyes in the PPV group, 193 eyes in the lens-sparing versus phaco-procedure group, and 643 eyes in the combined PPV and SB surgery group. Quality assessment revealed a low risk of bias in most domains. The meta-analysis results revealed a significant difference in postoperative BCVA between the PPV and PPV combined with SB groups (WMD = −0.17, 95% CI [0.27, 0.07], p = 0.001). The primary reattachment rates were 82.80% for PPV alone and 87.52% for PPV combined with SB (p = 0.34). The final reattachment rates did not differ significantly between PPV and PPV combined with SB (99% vs. 99.8%;RR = 1.00, 95% CI [1.01, 0.99], p = 0.96). PPV alone demonstrated a significantly reduced risk of macular edema compared to PPV combined with scleral buckling (9.9% vs. 23%;p = 0.006). The incidences of macular hole development (p = 0.46), recurrent retinal detachment (p = 0.27), proliferative vitreoretinopathy development (p = 0.48), epiretinal membrane proliferation (p = 0.77), and limited choroidal hemorrhage (p = 0.69) were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusions: These findings suggest that PPV alone may be a more effective treatment option in terms of visual acuity (VA) improvement, lower risk of macular edema and cataract development. However, there was no significant difference in VA improvement or complication rates between the lens-sparing and phaco-procedure groups. .
