57
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Call for Papers: Real-World Data as a Gold Mine

      Submit here by August 1, 2025

      About Ophthalmologica: 2.1 Impact Factor I 5.1 CiteScore I 0.992 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Supplemental Scleral Buckle for the Management of Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment by Pars Plana Vitrectomy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

      meta-analysis

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives: The present review aimed to synthesize evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared outcomes of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with and without a supplementary scleral buckle (SB) for management of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD). Methods: The authors searched MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL to identify RCTs in English that compared PPV with and without supplemental SB. Risk of bias was assessed according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. We present risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MDs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) estimated using random-effects meta-analyses. Results: We identified 6 RCTs involving 705 eyes. Primary reattachment (6 studies, 345 eyes PPV, 324 eyes PPV + SB; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93–1.06, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, p = 0.78) and final anatomic success rates (4 studies, 272 eyes PPV, 267 eyes PPV + SB; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.98–1.02, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, p = 0.89) were similar between the 2 groups. Postoperative visual acuity improvement (5 studies, 244 eyes PPV, 222 eyes PPV + SB; MD 6.09 letters, 95% CI -0.47–12.64, I<sup>2</sup> = 69%, p = 0.07) and frequency of adverse events (6 studies, 1,294 observations PPV, 1,221 observations PPV + SB; RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.57–1.01, I<sup>2</sup> = 25%, p = 0.06) likewise did not differ significantly between the treatment groups. Conclusion: Low-certainty evidence from RCTs did not demonstrate a benefit in placement of a supplemental SB during vitrectomy for management of RRD in the current analysis. Additional high-quality trials are needed to provide more precise estimates of the effect.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The GRADE System for Rating Clinical Guidelines

              Brian Kavanagh critiques the GRADE system of grading guidelines, arguing that even though it has evolved through the Evidence-Based Medicine movement, there is no evidence that GRADE itself is reliable.

                Author and article information

                Journal
                OPH
                Ophthalmologica
                10.1159/issn.0030-3755
                Ophthalmologica
                S. Karger AG
                0030-3755
                1423-0267
                2022
                May 2022
                03 November 2021
                : 245
                : 2
                : 101-110
                Affiliations
                [_a] aMichael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
                [_b] bDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
                [_c] cSt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton and McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
                [_d] dDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
                [_e] eMid Atlantic Retina, The Retina Service of Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
                [_f] fDepartment of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
                [_g] gRetina Consultants of Houston, Houston, Texas, USA
                [_h] hDepartment of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
                Author notes
                *Varun Chaudhary, vchaudh@mcmaster.ca
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0990-8616
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2102-9518
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7756-5091
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9988-4146
                Article
                520220 Ophthalmologica 2022;245:101–110
                10.1159/000520220
                34731858
                4f950b9a-5572-48e8-893c-b926ce738678
                © 2021 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                History
                : 24 June 2021
                : 14 October 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 1, Pages: 10
                Categories
                Meta-Analysis

                Vision sciences,Ophthalmology & Optometry,Pathology
                Rhegmatogenous retinal detachment,Pars plana vitrectomy,Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis,Scleral buckle

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log