Open Access

27‑Gauge vitrectomy vs. 25‑gauge vitrectomy in the management of proliferative diabetic retinopathy with preoperative intravitreal injection of conbercept

  • Authors:
    • Wu Xiang
    • Dong Fang
    • Xintong Jiang
    • Zhaotian Zhang
    • Chuqi Xiang
    • Shaofen Huang
    • Shaochong Zhang
    • Yantao Wei
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: August 17, 2023     https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2023.12171
  • Article Number: 472
  • Copyright: © Xiang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

Small‑gauge vitrectomy has become popular due to its notable advantages, including less trauma, shortened convalescence and improved manoeuvrability. The aim of the present study was to compare the surgical outcomes of 27‑gauge (27‑G) vitrectomy with those of 25‑gauge (25‑G) vitrectomy in the management of proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) with preoperative intravitreal injection of conbercept. The data of 48 consecutive patients with PDR (48 eyes) were retrospectively collected. The patients underwent conbercept intravitreal injection and pars plana vitrectomy with a 27‑G group (23 eyes) or 25‑G group (25 eyes) vitrectomy system. The operating time, suturing rate, endodiathermy rate, postoperative best‑corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP) and complications were recorded. The mean postoperative BCVA at final follow‑up was significantly improved compared with that at the baseline in both groups (P<0.001 for both). The differences in the mean BCVA changes between the two groups were not significant (P>0.99), and no differences were observed in the final central foveal thickness (P=0.51) between the two groups. The final IOP remained stable compared with that at the baseline in the 27‑G group (P=0.36) and the 25‑G group (P=0.05). The suturing rate was significantly decreased in the 27‑G group compared with the 25‑G group (P=0.04). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of the operating time (P=0.18), rate of endodiathermy use (P>0.99), iatrogenic retinal breaks (P=0.42) or postoperative recurrent vitreous haemorrhage (P>0.99). In addition, no case of ocular hypotony was observed in either group. In conclusion, 27‑G vitrectomy was as efficient and safe as 25‑G vitrectomy in the management of PDR in terms of operating time and complications. With reference to the literature, preoperative conbercept injection appears to assist in decreasing the incidence of intraoperative and postoperative complications.
View Figures
View References

Related Articles

Journal Cover

October-2023
Volume 26 Issue 4

Print ISSN: 1792-0981
Online ISSN:1792-1015

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Xiang W, Fang D, Jiang X, Zhang Z, Xiang C, Huang S, Zhang S and Wei Y: 27‑Gauge vitrectomy vs. 25‑gauge vitrectomy in the management of proliferative diabetic retinopathy with preoperative intravitreal injection of conbercept. Exp Ther Med 26: 472, 2023.
APA
Xiang, W., Fang, D., Jiang, X., Zhang, Z., Xiang, C., Huang, S. ... Wei, Y. (2023). 27‑Gauge vitrectomy vs. 25‑gauge vitrectomy in the management of proliferative diabetic retinopathy with preoperative intravitreal injection of conbercept. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine, 26, 472. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2023.12171
MLA
Xiang, W., Fang, D., Jiang, X., Zhang, Z., Xiang, C., Huang, S., Zhang, S., Wei, Y."27‑Gauge vitrectomy vs. 25‑gauge vitrectomy in the management of proliferative diabetic retinopathy with preoperative intravitreal injection of conbercept". Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 26.4 (2023): 472.
Chicago
Xiang, W., Fang, D., Jiang, X., Zhang, Z., Xiang, C., Huang, S., Zhang, S., Wei, Y."27‑Gauge vitrectomy vs. 25‑gauge vitrectomy in the management of proliferative diabetic retinopathy with preoperative intravitreal injection of conbercept". Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 26, no. 4 (2023): 472. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2023.12171