The history of pneumatic retinopexy: have we come full circle?

The historical literature on the treatment of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) was reviewed from 1911 to the present, focusing on the role of intravitreal air and gas. The history of the pneumatic retinopexy (PnR) technique is described from its original roots to the current day procedure. The treatment of RRD has evolved tremendously over the past century. The introduction of intravitreal gas as a tamponade to reattach the retina was critical in the development of modern day PnR. Although PnR is not a new technique, relatively recent randomized trials have demonstrated the numerous advantages of this procedure compared to pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) and scleral buckle. From a historical perspective, PnR has its origin in 1911 when Ohm performed intravitreal air injection after external subretinal fluid drainage in an attempt to treat RRD. The evolution of the procedure was driven by the introduction and experience with inert expansile intravitreal gas injections, and several great surgeons made critical contributions to the development of the procedure. There is substantial controversy pertaining to the original description of PnR in the literature. Credit has generally been given to Hilton and Grizzard from the United States, although Alfredo Dominguez from Spain published the first description of the procedure and he went to great lengths in an attempt to be rightfully recognized for this. The first randomized trial in retinal detachment repair was led by Dr. Paul Tornambe, comparing PnR to scleral buckle and an additional randomized trial was subsequently carried out demonstrating functional advantages of PnR compared to PPV.

Outcomes of Combined Scleral Buckling Plus Pneumatic Retinopexy Vs. Scleral Buckling for Primary Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment

PURPOSE

To evaluate the outcomes and complications of scleral buckle surgery alone or combined with pneumatic retinopexy (pneumatic buckle) for the treatment of primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

PARTICIPANTS

Two hundred thirteen patients with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment of whom 101 underwent primary scleral buckle surgery at Rabin Medical Center in 2005-2015 (SB group) and 112 underwent pneumatic buckle surgery at Royal Alexandra Hospital in 2013-2015 (PB group).

METHODS

All patients were followed for ≥12 months. Data on clinical and surgical parameters, outcome, and complications were collected from the medical files.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Best corrected visual acuity and anatomical outcomes.

RESULTS

At 12 months, average best corrected visual acuity was 0.3 logMar in the SB group and 0.42 logMar in the PB group (P < 0.05). Rates of anatomical reattachment were high and similar in the two groups (99% and 97%, respectively, P = 0.623). The SB group had a higher percentage of patients requiring additional laser applications (21% vs. 7%; P < 0.01) and buckle readjustment surgery (6% vs. 0; P = 0.01), and the PB group had a higher percentage of patients who required postoperative pars plana vitrectomy (30% vs. 17%; P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Scleral buckle surgery alone is efficient for the treatment of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Its combination with pneumatic retinopexy usually has no significant added value in terms of anatomical reattachment rate. Outcomes of Pneumatic buckling vs Scleral Buckling for RRD.

Glaucoma associated with the management of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment

Transient or permanent elevation of intraocular pressure (IOP) is a common complication following vitreoretinal surgery. Usually secondary glaucoma, which develops after scleral buckling procedures, or pars plana vitrectomy for repair of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment, is of multifactorial origin. It is essential, for appropriate management, to detect the cause of outflow obstruction. An exacerbation of preexisting open-angle glaucoma or a steroid-induced elevation of IOP should also be considered. Scleral buckling may be complicated by congestion and anterior rotation of the ciliary body resulting in secondary angle closure, which can usually resolve with medical therapy. The use of intravitreal gases may also induce secondary angle-closure with or without pupillary block. Aspiration of a quantity of the intraocular gas may be indicated. Secondary glaucoma can also develop after intravitreal injection of silicone oil due to pupillary block, inflammation, synechial angle closure, or migration of emulsified silicone oil in the anterior chamber and obstruction of the aqueous outflow pathway. In most eyes medical therapy is successful in controlling IOP; however, silicone oil removal with or without concurrent glaucoma surgery may also be required. Diode laser transscleral cyclophotocoagulation and glaucoma drainage devices constitute useful treatment modalities for long-term IOP control. Cooperation between vitreoretinal and glaucoma specialists is necessary to achieve successful management.