Are outcomes of surgery for retina detachments from giant tears worse than from other holes and tears in this era of small gauge vitrectomy and perflorocarbon use in Sub-Saharan Africa?

Aims

To report a comparison of clinical features, visual and anatomic outcomes between patients with retinal detachments from giant retinal tears (GRTs) and those from other types of holes and tears undergoing retina reattachment surgery in the same institution within the same time period in sub-Saharan Africa.

Materials and Methods

A retrospective noncomparative case series of patients undergoing primary retina detachment (RD) repair for rhegmatogenous retina detachment (RRD) at Eye Foundation Hospital Retina Institute between January 2014 and December 2018 was done.

Results

A total of 275 eyes of 275 patients met the inclusion criteria. Ages ranged from 7 to 87 years. And 81 (29.4%) eyes had giant tears were categorized as group A and 194 (70.6%) eyes had other types of tears were categorized as group B. At presentation Visual acuity in 66 eyes (79.6%) in the group A was worse than 3/60, compared to 117 eyes (60.3%) in group B. Primary anatomic success was achieved in 73 eyes (92.4%) in-group A and 157 eyes (86.7%) in group B. Final anatomic success was achieved in 75 eyes (94.9%) in group A and 164 eyes (93.2%) in group B. Good visual outcomes were achieved in 48 eyes (59.3%) in group A and 126 eyes (65.6%) in group B.

Conclusion

Good anatomic and visual outcomes can be achieved after surgery for RRD secondary to giant tears in a sub-Saharan Africa setting in this era of small gauge vitrectomy and perflourocarbon use, these outcomes are comparable to those from surgery for RRD secondary to other types of holes and tears.