4 research outputs found
Safety and effectiveness of pre-emptive diabetic vitrectomy in patients with severe, non-fibrotic retinal neovascularisation despite panretinal photocoagulation
Heavy silicone oil tamponade - a multicentre experience
OBJECTIVE: To report multicentred use of the heavy silicone oil Densiron 68 for anatomical reattachment following rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) repair and its associated complications. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Patients from seven vitreoretinal units within the UK that underwent RRD repair with Densiron 68 between January 2015 and December 2019 were identified. Primary outcome measures were primary and final reattachment rate, retained Densiron and failure rate. Secondary outcome measures were duration of tamponade, final visual acuity (VA) and complications of heavy silicone oil. RESULTS: 134 eyes of 134 patients were involved in the study. Primary surgical success was achieved in 48.5%, while a final reattachment rate of 73.4% was observed. The mean duration of Densiron 68 tamponade was 139.5 days. Mean final VA was 1.01 (range 0–2.9). 8 eyes (6.0%) required long-term topical steroids for anterior uveitis, whereas none of the eyes required long-term pressure-lowering treatment. Emulsification rate was 10.7% (6 eyes). CONCLUSION: This is the largest real-world study on Densiron 68 in the UK. Densiron 68 facilitates tamponade of inferior retinal pathology and may be considered as an option for tamponade of inferior retinal pathologies
Recommended from our members
International Classification System for Ocular Complications of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Agents in Clinical Trials
Complications associated with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapies are inconsistently reported in the literature, thus limiting an accurate evaluation and comparison of safety between studies. This study aimed to develop a standardized classification system for anti-VEGF ocular complications using the Delphi consensus process.
Systematic review and Delphi consensus process.
25 international retinal specialists participated in the Delphi consensus survey.
A systematic literature search was conducted to identify complications of intravitreal anti-VEGF agent administration based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of anti-VEGF therapy. A comprehensive list of complications was derived from these studies, and this list was subjected to iterative Delphi consensus surveys involving international retinal specialists that voted on inclusion, exclusion, rephrasing, and addition of complications. As well, surveys determined specifiers for the selected complications. This iterative process helped refine the final classification system.
The proportion of retinal specialists who choose to include or exclude complications associated with anti-VEGF administration.
After screening 18,229 articles, 130 complications were initially categorized from 145 included RCTs. Participant consensus via the Delphi method resulted in the inclusion of 91 (70%) complications after three rounds. After incorporating further modifications made based on participant suggestions, such as rewording certain phrases and combining similar terms, 24 redundant complications were removed, leaving a total of 67 (52%) complications in the final list. A total of 14 (11%) complications met exclusion thresholds and were eliminated by participants across both rounds. All other remaining complications not meeting inclusion or exclusion thresholds were also excluded from the final classification system after the Delphi process terminated. In addition, 47 out of 75 (63%) proposed complication specifiers were included based on participant agreement.
Using the Delphi consensus process, a comprehensive, standardized classification system consisting of 67 ocular complications and 47 unique specifiers was established for intravitreal anti-VEGF agents in clinical trials. The adoption of this system in future trials could improve consistency and quality of adverse event reporting, potentially facilitating more accurate risk-benefit analyses