Evidence Hub

Investigating ocular ischemic events following pars plana vitrectomy

Alshaikhsalama AM, Hashim H, Shieh D, Wang AL

European journal of ophthalmology, 2026

510,915 participants

Abstract

ObjectiveTo assess the incidence of post-vitrectomy ocular ischemic events, including retinal artery occlusion (RAO), retinal vein occlusion (RVO), and non-arteritic ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION).MethodsThis retrospective cohort study examined 120,350 patients who underwent vitrectomy. Using a multicenter healthcare database, patients with a CPT code for any vitrectomy procedure were assessed for subsequent ocular ischemic events. A follow-up analysis of 510,915 patients was performed to determine the risk attributable to vitrectomy versus clinical characteristics. Exclusion criteria included history of prior ocular ischemic events and less than 6 months of follow up.ResultsThe first post-operative month had a significantly higher risk of vascular occlusions compared to the 6-12-month period, with incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of 9.69 (95% CI: 6.9-13.7) for RAO, 11.43 (95% CI: 9.3-14.1) for RVO, and 8.75 (95% CI: 5.2-14.7) for NAION. The IRR for overall ischemic events was also increased during the first month following vitrectomy at 10.7 (95% CI: 9.0-12.7) and remained elevated up to 6 months later with an IRR of 1.49 (95% CI: 1.2-1.8) for the 3-6-month period compared to 6-12-months postoperatively. A separate multivariate analysis revealed that the risk of overall ischemic events was most correlated to vitrectomy (hazard ratio [HR] 3.32, 95% CI: 3.10-3.57) over multiple variables including cataract surgery (HR 1.49, 95% CI: 1.42-1.56) and nicotine use (HR 1.15, 95% CI:…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 510,915 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free