Visual recovery after vitrectomy for macular hole using 25-gauge instruments.

Hajime Shinoda, Kei Shinoda, Shingo Satofuka, Yutaka Imamura, Yoko Ozawa, Susumu Ishida, Makoto Inoue

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

40 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine whether vitrectomy with 25-gauge instruments contributes to better postoperative visual recovery after macular hole (MH) surgery. METHODS: The medical records for 46 consecutive eyes operated for MH by a single surgeon were retrospectively examined. Vitrectomy had been performed with a 25-gauge instrument in 23 eyes (25-G group) and with a 20-gauge instrument in 23 eyes (20-G group). Postoperative visual acuity (VA) in logMAR (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) units after 1 week and 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months, operating time, and volume of intraocular irrigating fluid were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Mean preoperative logMAR VA was 0.72 in the 25-G group and 0.68 in the 20-G group (p = 0.282, unpaired t-test). One week after surgery, VA was significantly better in the 25-G group (0.40 +/- 0.34) than in the 20-G group (0.58 +/- 0.30) (p = 0.020). This significant difference was maintained until 9 months after surgery, but was no longer evident at 12 months (p = 0.182). Operating time was significantly shorter in the 25-G group (56 +/- 16 mins) than in the 20-G group (85 +/- 28 mins) (p = 0.003, unpaired t-test). The volume of intraocular irrigating fluid was significantly less in the 25-G group (244 +/- 72 ml) than in the 20-G group (416 +/- 113 ml) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of 25-gauge vitrectomy instruments leads to better postoperative visual recovery following surgery for MH during the first 9 months, probably as a result of shorter surgical time and a lower volume of intraocular irrigating fluid.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)151-155
Number of pages5
JournalActa Ophthalmologica
Volume86
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2008 Mar

Fingerprint

Retinal Perforations
Vitrectomy
Aqueous Humor
Visual Acuity
Operative Time
Medical Records

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

Shinoda, H., Shinoda, K., Satofuka, S., Imamura, Y., Ozawa, Y., Ishida, S., & Inoue, M. (2008). Visual recovery after vitrectomy for macular hole using 25-gauge instruments. Acta Ophthalmologica, 86(2), 151-155.

Visual recovery after vitrectomy for macular hole using 25-gauge instruments. / Shinoda, Hajime; Shinoda, Kei; Satofuka, Shingo; Imamura, Yutaka; Ozawa, Yoko; Ishida, Susumu; Inoue, Makoto.

In: Acta Ophthalmologica, Vol. 86, No. 2, 03.2008, p. 151-155.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Shinoda, H, Shinoda, K, Satofuka, S, Imamura, Y, Ozawa, Y, Ishida, S & Inoue, M 2008, 'Visual recovery after vitrectomy for macular hole using 25-gauge instruments.', Acta Ophthalmologica, vol. 86, no. 2, pp. 151-155.
Shinoda H, Shinoda K, Satofuka S, Imamura Y, Ozawa Y, Ishida S et al. Visual recovery after vitrectomy for macular hole using 25-gauge instruments. Acta Ophthalmologica. 2008 Mar;86(2):151-155.
Shinoda, Hajime ; Shinoda, Kei ; Satofuka, Shingo ; Imamura, Yutaka ; Ozawa, Yoko ; Ishida, Susumu ; Inoue, Makoto. / Visual recovery after vitrectomy for macular hole using 25-gauge instruments. In: Acta Ophthalmologica. 2008 ; Vol. 86, No. 2. pp. 151-155.
@article{debc9bbe67004840a492ab7e53f3235d,
title = "Visual recovery after vitrectomy for macular hole using 25-gauge instruments.",
abstract = "PURPOSE: To determine whether vitrectomy with 25-gauge instruments contributes to better postoperative visual recovery after macular hole (MH) surgery. METHODS: The medical records for 46 consecutive eyes operated for MH by a single surgeon were retrospectively examined. Vitrectomy had been performed with a 25-gauge instrument in 23 eyes (25-G group) and with a 20-gauge instrument in 23 eyes (20-G group). Postoperative visual acuity (VA) in logMAR (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) units after 1 week and 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months, operating time, and volume of intraocular irrigating fluid were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Mean preoperative logMAR VA was 0.72 in the 25-G group and 0.68 in the 20-G group (p = 0.282, unpaired t-test). One week after surgery, VA was significantly better in the 25-G group (0.40 +/- 0.34) than in the 20-G group (0.58 +/- 0.30) (p = 0.020). This significant difference was maintained until 9 months after surgery, but was no longer evident at 12 months (p = 0.182). Operating time was significantly shorter in the 25-G group (56 +/- 16 mins) than in the 20-G group (85 +/- 28 mins) (p = 0.003, unpaired t-test). The volume of intraocular irrigating fluid was significantly less in the 25-G group (244 +/- 72 ml) than in the 20-G group (416 +/- 113 ml) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of 25-gauge vitrectomy instruments leads to better postoperative visual recovery following surgery for MH during the first 9 months, probably as a result of shorter surgical time and a lower volume of intraocular irrigating fluid.",
author = "Hajime Shinoda and Kei Shinoda and Shingo Satofuka and Yutaka Imamura and Yoko Ozawa and Susumu Ishida and Makoto Inoue",
year = "2008",
month = "3",
language = "English",
volume = "86",
pages = "151--155",
journal = "Acta Ophthalmologica",
issn = "1755-375X",
publisher = "Copenhagen Scriptor",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Visual recovery after vitrectomy for macular hole using 25-gauge instruments.

AU - Shinoda, Hajime

AU - Shinoda, Kei

AU - Satofuka, Shingo

AU - Imamura, Yutaka

AU - Ozawa, Yoko

AU - Ishida, Susumu

AU - Inoue, Makoto

PY - 2008/3

Y1 - 2008/3

N2 - PURPOSE: To determine whether vitrectomy with 25-gauge instruments contributes to better postoperative visual recovery after macular hole (MH) surgery. METHODS: The medical records for 46 consecutive eyes operated for MH by a single surgeon were retrospectively examined. Vitrectomy had been performed with a 25-gauge instrument in 23 eyes (25-G group) and with a 20-gauge instrument in 23 eyes (20-G group). Postoperative visual acuity (VA) in logMAR (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) units after 1 week and 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months, operating time, and volume of intraocular irrigating fluid were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Mean preoperative logMAR VA was 0.72 in the 25-G group and 0.68 in the 20-G group (p = 0.282, unpaired t-test). One week after surgery, VA was significantly better in the 25-G group (0.40 +/- 0.34) than in the 20-G group (0.58 +/- 0.30) (p = 0.020). This significant difference was maintained until 9 months after surgery, but was no longer evident at 12 months (p = 0.182). Operating time was significantly shorter in the 25-G group (56 +/- 16 mins) than in the 20-G group (85 +/- 28 mins) (p = 0.003, unpaired t-test). The volume of intraocular irrigating fluid was significantly less in the 25-G group (244 +/- 72 ml) than in the 20-G group (416 +/- 113 ml) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of 25-gauge vitrectomy instruments leads to better postoperative visual recovery following surgery for MH during the first 9 months, probably as a result of shorter surgical time and a lower volume of intraocular irrigating fluid.

AB - PURPOSE: To determine whether vitrectomy with 25-gauge instruments contributes to better postoperative visual recovery after macular hole (MH) surgery. METHODS: The medical records for 46 consecutive eyes operated for MH by a single surgeon were retrospectively examined. Vitrectomy had been performed with a 25-gauge instrument in 23 eyes (25-G group) and with a 20-gauge instrument in 23 eyes (20-G group). Postoperative visual acuity (VA) in logMAR (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) units after 1 week and 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months, operating time, and volume of intraocular irrigating fluid were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Mean preoperative logMAR VA was 0.72 in the 25-G group and 0.68 in the 20-G group (p = 0.282, unpaired t-test). One week after surgery, VA was significantly better in the 25-G group (0.40 +/- 0.34) than in the 20-G group (0.58 +/- 0.30) (p = 0.020). This significant difference was maintained until 9 months after surgery, but was no longer evident at 12 months (p = 0.182). Operating time was significantly shorter in the 25-G group (56 +/- 16 mins) than in the 20-G group (85 +/- 28 mins) (p = 0.003, unpaired t-test). The volume of intraocular irrigating fluid was significantly less in the 25-G group (244 +/- 72 ml) than in the 20-G group (416 +/- 113 ml) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of 25-gauge vitrectomy instruments leads to better postoperative visual recovery following surgery for MH during the first 9 months, probably as a result of shorter surgical time and a lower volume of intraocular irrigating fluid.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=43549115049&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=43549115049&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 86

SP - 151

EP - 155

JO - Acta Ophthalmologica

JF - Acta Ophthalmologica

SN - 1755-375X

IS - 2

ER -