Cargando…

Short-Term Results of Ocriplasmin versus Prompt Vitrectomy for Macular Hole. Which Performs Better?

In this retrospective study, we compared the anatomical and functional changes in patients with vitreomacular traction associated with macular holes between the following groups: (1) Patients who were treated with a single intravitreal injection of ocriplasmin (the OCRIALONE group); (2) those who fa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cacciamani, Andrea, Cosimi, Pamela, Di Nicola, Marta, Ripandelli, Guido, Scarinci, Fabio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7762417/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33297588
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9123972
_version_ 1783627800783093760
author Cacciamani, Andrea
Cosimi, Pamela
Di Nicola, Marta
Ripandelli, Guido
Scarinci, Fabio
author_facet Cacciamani, Andrea
Cosimi, Pamela
Di Nicola, Marta
Ripandelli, Guido
Scarinci, Fabio
author_sort Cacciamani, Andrea
collection PubMed
description In this retrospective study, we compared the anatomical and functional changes in patients with vitreomacular traction associated with macular holes between the following groups: (1) Patients who were treated with a single intravitreal injection of ocriplasmin (the OCRIALONE group); (2) those who failed the ocriplasmin treatment and underwent vitrectomy one month later (the OCRIVIT group); and (3) patients who directly underwent par plana vitrectomy (VITREALONE group). A total of 38 patients, 19 in the OCRIALONE group + OCRIVIT group (seven and 12 patients, respectively) and 19 in the VITREALONE group with focal vitreomacular adhesion associated with macular holes were evaluated with spectral domain optical coherence tomography. Functional examinations included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and microperimetry analysis. Visual function changes were compared between the OCRIALONE group + OCRIVIT group and VITREALONE group up to three months. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis compared the OCRIVIT group and the VITREALONE group. BCVA values and the mean retinal sensitivity showed statistically significant improvement in all groups (p < 0.001). Specifically, the retinal sensitivity values at the end of the follow-up were significantly higher in the OCRIALONE group + OCRIVIT group than in the VITREALONE group. These functional findings were also confirmed when the statistical analysis was conducted between the OCRIVIT group and the VITREALONE group. Although the OCRIALONE group + OCRIVIT group exhibited faster retinal thinning than the VITREALONE group (p = 0.006), the analysis of the OCRIVIT group versus the VITREALONE group did not show any statistically significant difference. The better functional results and similar anatomical findings suggest that ocriplasmin can be used as a first-line treatment, and that prompt pars plana vitrectomy as primary surgery does not provide better outcomes in comparison with pars plana vitrectomy after ocriplasmin injection.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7762417
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77624172020-12-26 Short-Term Results of Ocriplasmin versus Prompt Vitrectomy for Macular Hole. Which Performs Better? Cacciamani, Andrea Cosimi, Pamela Di Nicola, Marta Ripandelli, Guido Scarinci, Fabio J Clin Med Article In this retrospective study, we compared the anatomical and functional changes in patients with vitreomacular traction associated with macular holes between the following groups: (1) Patients who were treated with a single intravitreal injection of ocriplasmin (the OCRIALONE group); (2) those who failed the ocriplasmin treatment and underwent vitrectomy one month later (the OCRIVIT group); and (3) patients who directly underwent par plana vitrectomy (VITREALONE group). A total of 38 patients, 19 in the OCRIALONE group + OCRIVIT group (seven and 12 patients, respectively) and 19 in the VITREALONE group with focal vitreomacular adhesion associated with macular holes were evaluated with spectral domain optical coherence tomography. Functional examinations included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and microperimetry analysis. Visual function changes were compared between the OCRIALONE group + OCRIVIT group and VITREALONE group up to three months. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis compared the OCRIVIT group and the VITREALONE group. BCVA values and the mean retinal sensitivity showed statistically significant improvement in all groups (p < 0.001). Specifically, the retinal sensitivity values at the end of the follow-up were significantly higher in the OCRIALONE group + OCRIVIT group than in the VITREALONE group. These functional findings were also confirmed when the statistical analysis was conducted between the OCRIVIT group and the VITREALONE group. Although the OCRIALONE group + OCRIVIT group exhibited faster retinal thinning than the VITREALONE group (p = 0.006), the analysis of the OCRIVIT group versus the VITREALONE group did not show any statistically significant difference. The better functional results and similar anatomical findings suggest that ocriplasmin can be used as a first-line treatment, and that prompt pars plana vitrectomy as primary surgery does not provide better outcomes in comparison with pars plana vitrectomy after ocriplasmin injection. MDPI 2020-12-07 /pmc/articles/PMC7762417/ /pubmed/33297588 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9123972 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Cacciamani, Andrea
Cosimi, Pamela
Di Nicola, Marta
Ripandelli, Guido
Scarinci, Fabio
Short-Term Results of Ocriplasmin versus Prompt Vitrectomy for Macular Hole. Which Performs Better?
title Short-Term Results of Ocriplasmin versus Prompt Vitrectomy for Macular Hole. Which Performs Better?
title_full Short-Term Results of Ocriplasmin versus Prompt Vitrectomy for Macular Hole. Which Performs Better?
title_fullStr Short-Term Results of Ocriplasmin versus Prompt Vitrectomy for Macular Hole. Which Performs Better?
title_full_unstemmed Short-Term Results of Ocriplasmin versus Prompt Vitrectomy for Macular Hole. Which Performs Better?
title_short Short-Term Results of Ocriplasmin versus Prompt Vitrectomy for Macular Hole. Which Performs Better?
title_sort short-term results of ocriplasmin versus prompt vitrectomy for macular hole. which performs better?
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7762417/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33297588
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9123972
work_keys_str_mv AT cacciamaniandrea shorttermresultsofocriplasminversuspromptvitrectomyformacularholewhichperformsbetter
AT cosimipamela shorttermresultsofocriplasminversuspromptvitrectomyformacularholewhichperformsbetter
AT dinicolamarta shorttermresultsofocriplasminversuspromptvitrectomyformacularholewhichperformsbetter
AT ripandelliguido shorttermresultsofocriplasminversuspromptvitrectomyformacularholewhichperformsbetter
AT scarincifabio shorttermresultsofocriplasminversuspromptvitrectomyformacularholewhichperformsbetter