Pars plana vitrectomy versus three intravitreal injections of bevacizumab for nontractional diabetic macular edema. A prospective, randomized comparative study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) and removal of the internal limiting membrane (ILM) with three, monthly, intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injections for refractory diabetic macular edema. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, comparative, interventional study. Forty-four patients were enrolled and randomized in two groups. Twenty-two eyes enrolled in Group I received three IVB injections at monthly interval. Twenty-two eyes were enrolled in Group II which underwent PPV with ILM removal. The primary outcomes measured were: (1) Best corrected logMAR visual acuity (BCVA) using Snellen's visual acuity chart. (2) Central macular thickness (CMT) on optical coherence tomography. The secondary outcome measures were: Complication rates like (1) progression of lens opacities, (2) high intraocular pressure needing further treatment/procedure, (3) development of vitreous hemorrhage related to the procedure employed, (4) retinal detachment and (5) severe inflammation/endophthalmitis. RESULTS: In Group I (IVB): 3 (13.6%) eyes showed no change in BCVA; 3 (13.6%) eyes reported decrease in BCVA and 16 (72.8%) eyes showed improvement in BCVA; (P = 0.0181). In Group II (PPV): 4 (18.2%) eyes showed no change in BCVA; 5 (22.7%) eyes showed decrease and 13 (59.1%) eyes showed improvement in BCVA (P = 0.0281). Mean decrease in CMT in IVB group was 108.45 µ, whereas mean decrease in CMT in PPV group was 161.36 µ. No major complications were seen in either group. CONCLUSION: Posttreatment decrease in CMT was more in PPV group and vision improvement more in IVB group. However, no statistically significant difference between the two methods was found.

Endophthalmitis after vitrectomy and vitrectomy combined with phacoemulsification: incidence and visual outcomes.

PURPOSE: To study the incidence of endophthalmitis after vitrectomy and after combined vitrectomy and phacoemulsification surgery and to report the results of treatment in such cases. METHODS: This is a retrospective, noncomparative, interventional study based at a tertiary ophthalmology center in Kuwait. Cases of vitrectomy only and combined vitrectomy with phacoemulsification surgery performed during the period from January 1, 1997, to December 31, 2007, were included. Patients undergoing vitrectomy for traumatic etiologies and endophthalmitis were excluded. Patients who developed endophthalmitis after vitrectomy were identified and their records were analyzed. RESULTS: Six patients developed endophthalmitis among 2965 cases of all vitrectomy procedures, resulting in an incidence of 0.20%. The incidence of endophthalmitis was 0.12% for cases undergoing vitrectomy (3 out of 2564 cases) and 0.75% for cases undergoing combined vitrectomy and phacoemulsification surgery (3 out of 401 cases), respectively. Three cases were culture positive. Four cases ended up with final visual acuity of perception of hand movements or worse. CONCLUSIONS: Incidence of endophthalmitis in our series was higher than in other studies. The visual results were poor in 4 out of 6 cases. Earlier diagnosis and more aggressive approach may be needed to improve the results of treatment in these cases.