1,721,027 research outputs found

    SURGICAL OUTCOMES OF VITREOMACULAR TRACTION TREATED WITH FOVEAL-SPARING PEELING OF THE INTERNAL LIMITING MEMBRANE

    No full text
    PURPOSE: To compare sensitivity of the retina after complete internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling versus foveal-sparing ILM peeling in vitrectomy for vitreomacular traction syndrome. METHODS: This was a randomized, prospective, comparative study. Thirty-four eyes were randomized to undergo peeling with foveal sparing of the ILM (FS group) or complete peeling group. Foveal and perifoveal retinal sensitivity, visual acuity, and central macular thickness were the main outcome measures. RESULTS: Parafoveal retinal sensitivity exhibited a significant improvement in both the FS and complete peeling groups (+2.43 ± 0.82 dB and +1.79 ± 0.86 dB, respectively; P = 0.037). Significant improvements were observed in both visual acuity and central macular thickness in both groups. No cases of epiretinal membrane recurrence were observed in the FS group. CONCLUSION: Both the FS and complete peeling surgical techniques are safe and yielded good anatomical and functional results; however, a significant difference in favor of FS was found in relation to the best-corrected visual acuity and perifoveal retinal sensitivity. Preservation of the foveal ILM disc allowed the anatomical restoration of the foveal architecture in most vitreomacular traction syndrome cases without signs of stiffening or ILM fibrosis over a follow-up period of 1 year

    Intravitreal Bevacizumab versus Low Fluence Photodynamic Therapy for the treatmentof Chronic Central Serous Chorioretinopathy

    No full text
    Abstract PURPOSE: To report the effectiveness and safety of intravitreal bevacizumab injection (IVB) compared with low-fluence photodynamic therapy (L-PDT) in eyes with chronic central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC). METHODS: This was a prospective comparative interventional study of 22 patients affected by chronic CSC. Patients were randomly assigned to group 1 (12 patients treated with 1.25 mg IVB) and group 2 (10 patients treated with L-PDT). In group 2, PDT with verteporfin was delivered at low fluence (300 mW/cm(2) for 83 s, 25 J/cm(2)). Follow-up visits were scheduled at 1, 3, 6, and 9 months. RESULTS: The improvement in visual acuity was greater in group 1 than in group 2, although the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.59). The mean change in central point thickness over 9 months from baseline was 127 μm (SD 36) in group 1 and 114 μm (SD 42) in group 2. After the first injection, retreatments were given if recurrence was noted, with an average of 3.0 ± 1 injections in group 1 and 1.6 ± 0.6 treatments with L-PDT in group 2. The difference between retreatment in the 2 groups was not statistically significant (P = 0.45). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results obtained after 9 months of follow-up, our study provides evidence that IVB may be a treatment option for chronic CSC
    corecore