Skip to main content
Home
Zeitschriften
Zeitungen
Podcast
Gesundheitspolitik
Praxis
Allerlei
Jobs
Fachgebiete
Allgemeinmedizin Anästhesiologie & Intensivmedizin Apotheke Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kinder & Jugendheilkunde Neurologie & Psychiatrie Orthopädie & Unfallchirurgie Pflege Urologie Zahnmedizin
Subfächer Innere Medizin
Diabetologie Gastroenterologie Infektiologie Kardiologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Pneumologie Rheumatologie
Fortbildungen
Überblick Fortbildungen DFP-Literaturstudium-Artikel DFP-Webcast Fortbildungen DFP-Podcasts
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Spektrum der Augenheilkunde
Erschienen in:

01.06.2012 | short review

23-gauge versus 20-gauge vitrectomy: analysis of 110 consecutive cases undergoing epiretinal membrane peeling and macular hole repair

verfasst von: Martina C. Herwig, MD, Nicole Eter, MD

Erschienen in: Spektrum der Augenheilkunde | Ausgabe 3/2012

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Summary

Purpose 23G vitrectomy is a new approach towards minimal invasive vitreoretinal surgery. However, many concerns have been raised related to its safety. A case-to-case comparison with 20G vitrectomy, therefore, appears prudent.
Methods Our first 55 consecutive cases treated with 23G vitrectomy for epiretinal membrane peeling and macular hole repair were compared to 55 matching patients treated with 20G vitrectomy.
Results Patients who underwent 23G surgery had a statistically significant shorter procedure time than the 20G vitrectomy group (20G: 46±15 min; 23G: 33±09 min). We found no higher incidence of endophthalmitis, severe enduring postoperative hypotony, or retinal detachment in the 23G group.
Conclusion 23G vitrectomy is time-saving compared to 20G vitrectomy while being equally safe. Thus, 23G vitrectomy is recommended as standard procedure for epiretinal membrane peeling and macular hole repair.
Vorheriger Artikel European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) an der Schielambulanz der Universitäts-Augenklinik Graz
Nächster Artikel Gesellschaftsberichte
Literatur
1.
Fine HF, Iranmanesh R, Iturralde D, Spaide RF. Outcomes of 77 consecutive cases of 23-gauge transconjunctival vitrectomy surgery for posterior segment disease. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:1197–200.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Wimpissinger B, Kellner L, Brannath W, et al. 23-Gauge versus 20-gauge system for pars plana vitrectomy: a prospective randomised clinical trial. Br J Ophthalmol. 2008;92:1483–7.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Hikichi T, Kosaka S, Takami K, et al. 23- and 20-gauge vitrectomy with air tamponade with combined phacoemulsification for idiopathic macular hole: a single-surgeon study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2011;152:114–21.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Hikichi T, Matsumoto N, Ohtsuka H, et al. Comparison of one-year outcomes between 23- and 20-gauge vitrectomy for preretinal membrane. Am J Ophthalmol. 2009;147:639–43.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Nagpal M, Wartikar S, Nagpal K. Comparison of clinical outcomes and wound dynamics of sclerotomy ports of 20, 25, and 23 gauge vitrectomy. Retina. 2009;29:225–31.PubMedCrossRef
6.
7.
Woo SJ, Park KH, Hwang JM, Kim JH, Yu YS, Chung H. Risk factors associated with sclerotomy leakage and postoperative hypotony after 23-gauge transconjunctival sutureless vitrectomy. Retina. 2009;29:456–63.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Kunimoto DY, Kaiser RS. Incidence of endophthalmitis after 20- and 25-gauge vitrectomy. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:2133–7.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Scott IU, Flynn HW Jr, Acar N, Dev S, Shaikh S, Mittra RA, et al. Incidence of endophthalmitis after 20-gauge vs 23-gauge vs 25-gauge pars plana vitrectomy. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2011;249:377–80.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Thompson JT. Advantages and limitations of small gauge vitrectomy. Surv Ophthalmol. 2011;56:162–72.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Heimann H. Primary 25- and 23-gauge vitrectomy in the treatment of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment–advancement of surgical technique or erroneous trend? Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd. 2008;225:947–56.PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
23-gauge versus 20-gauge vitrectomy: analysis of 110 consecutive cases undergoing epiretinal membrane peeling and macular hole repair
verfasst von
Martina C. Herwig, MD
Nicole Eter, MD
Publikationsdatum
01.06.2012
Verlag
Springer Vienna
Erschienen in
Spektrum der Augenheilkunde / Ausgabe 3/2012
Print ISSN: 0930-4282
Elektronische ISSN: 1613-7523
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00717-012-0104-y

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2012

European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) an der Schielambulanz der Universitäts-Augenklinik Graz

  • originalarbeit

Das augenfachärztliche Gutachten

  • Übersicht

Descemet-Membran-Endothelkeratoplastik (DMEK) 6 Monats Ergebnisse der ersten 20 Fälle

  • originalarbeit

The success of treating keratoconus: visual acuity and follow-up with ultrasound biomicroscopy

  • original article

kongresskalender

  • kongresskalender

Gesellschaftsberichte

  • berichte und interviews