Evidence Hub

Combining phacoemulsification with pars plana vitrectomy in patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy: a series of 223 cases

Lahey JM, Francis RR, Kearney JJ

Ophthalmology, 2003

223 participants

Abstract

PURPOSE: To describe the results of combined phacoemulsification, insertion of posterior chamber intraocular lens (PCIOL), and pars plana vitrectomy for patients with retinal disorders resulting from diabetic retinopathy.

DESIGN: Retrospective, consecutive, noncomparative, interventional case series.

PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred twenty-three patients with vitreoretinal disorders secondary to diabetic retinopathy.

METHODS: A case series of 223 consecutive patients with retinal disorders resulting from diabetic retinopathy who underwent combined phacoemulsification, insertion of PCIOL, and pars plana vitrectomy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Vision, number of secondary procedures, and complications.

RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-three patients (153 with vitreous hemorrhage, 58 with traction retinal detachment, and 12 with macular traction) underwent combined surgery. The average increase in vision was 4.3 Snellen lines. The average follow-up was 10 months. Retinal detachment occurred in 5% of patients who underwent surgery. Diabetic macular edema was found in 12% after combined surgery. Cystoid macular edema was found in 3%. Vitreous hemorrhage requiring another procedure occurred in 11%. Twenty-two patients (10%) required a repeat vitrectomy (12 for vitreous hemorrhage and 10 for retinal detachment).

CONCLUSIONS: Combined phacoemulsification, insertion of PCIOL, posterior capsulectomy, and pars plana vitrectomy can be used to treat patients with complications resulting from proliferative…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 223 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