Published in:
19-08-2022 | Refractive Errors | Review
Pars plana vitrectomy combined with phacoemulsification versus pars plana vitrectomy only for treatment of phakic rhegmatogenous retinal detachment: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors:
Ahmad Mirshahi, Elias Khalilipour, Hooshang Faghihi, Hamid Riazi-Esfahani, Romina Mirshahi, Hadi Z. Mehrjardi, Ehsan Najibzadeh, Abdulrahim Amini, Amin Nabavi
Published in:
International Ophthalmology
|
Issue 2/2023
Login to get access
Abstract
Purpose
To compare the visual, refractive, and anatomical outcomes and incidence of complications between combined pars plana vitrectomy and phacoemulsification (phacovitrectomy) versus pars plana vitrectomy (PPV-only) in phakic eyes with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD).
Methods
Two independent reviewers searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, and Web of Science to identify relevant articles. Prospective or retrospective studies comparing PPV-only and phacovitrectomy for RRD were included. Recruited studies provided information about at least anatomical success or refractive outcomes. Meta-analysis was performed for single surgery success rate, final best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), postoperative complications, mean predicted refractive error, and mean absolute predicted refractive error.
Results
Seven studies (788 eyes) were selected, including two clinical trials and five retrospective comparative case series. The single surgery success rate was similar in PPV-only and phacovitrectomy groups (risk ratio [RR] = 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.95–1.10; P = 0.57). Mean final BCVA was significantly better in the PPV-only group than the phacovitrectomy group (MD = 0.06; 95% CI 0.00–0.12; P = 0.04). The risk of epiretinal membrane formation was significantly higher in eyes that underwent phacovitrectomy than PPV-only (RR = 2.85; 0.95% CI 1.5–5.41; P = 0.001). Phacovitrectomy group showed a more myopic final mean predicted refractive error than PPV-only group (MD = −0.31; 95% CI −0.55–−0.07; P = 0.01).
Conclusion
There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the anatomical outcome. Slightly better visual and refractive results were observed in the PPV-only group. However, the results should be interpreted with caution as the majority of included studies were low-quality retrospective studies.