Anatomic, Visual, and Financial Outcomes for Traditional and Nontraditional Primary Pneumatic Retinopexy for Retinal Detachment
- PMID: 30684455
- PMCID: PMC6445687
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2019.01.008
Anatomic, Visual, and Financial Outcomes for Traditional and Nontraditional Primary Pneumatic Retinopexy for Retinal Detachment
Abstract
Purpose: To determine factors predictive of anatomic, visual, and financial outcomes after traditional and nontraditional primary pneumatic retinopexy (PR) for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RD).
Design: Retrospective interventional case series and cost comparison.
Methods: Participants: Total of 178 eyes (156 patients) with PR-repaired primary RD by a single surgeon at a clinical practice from January 2001 to December 2013 and followed for ≥1 year. The cohort had 2 subgroups: traditional (TPR) and nontraditional (NTPR) PR.
Main outcome measures: Characteristics associated with best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and anatomic outcomes. Cost analysis and potential cost savings comparing PR to scleral buckle and vitrectomy.
Results: One hundred thirty-one of 178 eyes (73.5%) were successfully treated at 1 year (postoperative year 1): 72.8% (75/103) in TPR and 74.6% (56/75) in NTPR. Macula-off detachment (-0.44 logMAR, P < .001) and clock hours of RD (-0.84 logMAR, P < .001) correlated with improved BCVA; pseudophakia (0.26 logMAR, P = .002) and inferior retinal tears (0.62 logMAR, P = .009) correlated with worsening BCVA. Pseudophakia (-0.15, P = .03), inferior quadrant RD (-0.27, P < .001), and proliferative vitreoretinopathy (-0.68, P < .001) correlated with anatomic failure. Total average cost for TPR and NTPR was $1248.37 ± $882.11 and $1471.91 ± $942.84, respectively (P = .10). PR had a potential cost savings of 62% and 60.8% when compared to scleral buckle and vitrectomy, respectively.
Conclusions: PR results in successful anatomic and visual outcomes in both TPR and NTPR repair of primary RD. Preoperative pseudophakia is associated with worse visual outcomes and less anatomic success. The cost of primary PR and subsequent procedures to achieve final anatomic success was not significantly different between TPR and NTPR, and supports the possible cost-effectiveness of expanded indications for PR.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Figures

References
-
- Hilton GF, Grizzard WS. Pneumatic retinopexy. A two-step outpatient operation without conjunctival incision. Ophthalmology 1986;93(5):626–641. - PubMed
-
- Tornambe PE, Hilton GF, Brinton DA, et al. Pneumatic retinopexy. A two-year follow-up study of the multicenter clinical trial comparing pneumatic retinopexy with scleral buckling. Ophthalmology 1991;98(7):1115–1123. - PubMed
-
- Tornambe PE, Hilton GF. Pneumatic retinopexy. A multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial comparing pneumatic retinopexy with scleral buckling. The Retinal Detachment Study Group. Ophthalmology 1989;96(6):772–783; - PubMed
-
- Petrushkin HJ, Elgohary MA, Sullivan PM. Rescue Pneumatic Retinopexy in Patients with Failed Primary Retinal Detachment Surgery. Retina 2015;35(9):1851–1859. - PubMed
-
- Assi AC, Charteris DG, Pearson RV, Gregor ZJ. Pneumatic retinopexy in the treatment of primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Eye 1999;13(Pt 6):725–728. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous