Limits...
Learning curve of sutureless transconjunctival 20-gauge vitrectomy.

Simanjuntak GW, Kartasasmita AS, Georgalas I, Gotzaridis EV - Clin Ophthalmol (2014)

Bottom Line: A 20 G microvitreoretinal blade was introduced, beveled transconjunctivally, slowly, parallel with the limbus, creating a conjunctivoscleral tunnel incision.The true learning curve was the first three patients.There were three cases where suturing the sclerotomy was necessary: one port in each case, three of 32 cases (9.3%), or three of 96 ports (2.9%).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Christian University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia ; Cikini Eye Institute, Cikini CCI Hospital, Jakarta, Indonesia.

ABSTRACT

Background: To report the learning curve of transition from 20-gauge (20 G) conventional vitrectomy to a 20 G sutureless vitrectomy technique.

Materials and methods: This is a retrospective descriptive case study of 32 eyes from 32 consecutive patients who underwent sutureless 20 G pars plana vitrectomy. A 20 G microvitreoretinal blade was introduced, beveled transconjunctivally, slowly, parallel with the limbus, creating a conjunctivoscleral tunnel incision. Study participants were divided into three groups, and surgical time, induced astigmatism, and complications were compared.

Results: Of 32 consecutive patients, there was no significant difference in induced astigmatism or maneuvering between the early learning curve and other groups. The true learning curve was the first three patients. There were three cases where suturing the sclerotomy was necessary: one port in each case, three of 32 cases (9.3%), or three of 96 ports (2.9%).

Conclusion: There were no significant difficulties in surgical maneuvers while performing 20 g sutureless vitrectomy.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Total surgical time in each learning-curve group.Note: *A case from group 3 where the surgical time was longer than the mean time in that group.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4109639&req=5

f2-opth-8-1355: Total surgical time in each learning-curve group.Note: *A case from group 3 where the surgical time was longer than the mean time in that group.

Mentions: As far as induced astigmatism is concerned, there was no significant difference between the early learning curve (group 1 consisting of ten patients) with other groups. Similarly, there was no difference when comparing the time required to make a sclerotomy (T1) and closing sclerotomy (sutureless [T2]). The only significant difference was total time (sum of T1 + T2) between group 1 and group 2 − 0.97 minutes (Table 2) – and there was no difference between groups 2 and 3. It was shown that actually the true learning curve comprised the first three patients in group 1, and the rest of the cases needed almost similar total time (Figures 1 and 2).


Learning curve of sutureless transconjunctival 20-gauge vitrectomy.

Simanjuntak GW, Kartasasmita AS, Georgalas I, Gotzaridis EV - Clin Ophthalmol (2014)

Total surgical time in each learning-curve group.Note: *A case from group 3 where the surgical time was longer than the mean time in that group.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4109639&req=5

f2-opth-8-1355: Total surgical time in each learning-curve group.Note: *A case from group 3 where the surgical time was longer than the mean time in that group.
Mentions: As far as induced astigmatism is concerned, there was no significant difference between the early learning curve (group 1 consisting of ten patients) with other groups. Similarly, there was no difference when comparing the time required to make a sclerotomy (T1) and closing sclerotomy (sutureless [T2]). The only significant difference was total time (sum of T1 + T2) between group 1 and group 2 − 0.97 minutes (Table 2) – and there was no difference between groups 2 and 3. It was shown that actually the true learning curve comprised the first three patients in group 1, and the rest of the cases needed almost similar total time (Figures 1 and 2).

Bottom Line: A 20 G microvitreoretinal blade was introduced, beveled transconjunctivally, slowly, parallel with the limbus, creating a conjunctivoscleral tunnel incision.The true learning curve was the first three patients.There were three cases where suturing the sclerotomy was necessary: one port in each case, three of 32 cases (9.3%), or three of 96 ports (2.9%).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Christian University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia ; Cikini Eye Institute, Cikini CCI Hospital, Jakarta, Indonesia.

ABSTRACT

Background: To report the learning curve of transition from 20-gauge (20 G) conventional vitrectomy to a 20 G sutureless vitrectomy technique.

Materials and methods: This is a retrospective descriptive case study of 32 eyes from 32 consecutive patients who underwent sutureless 20 G pars plana vitrectomy. A 20 G microvitreoretinal blade was introduced, beveled transconjunctivally, slowly, parallel with the limbus, creating a conjunctivoscleral tunnel incision. Study participants were divided into three groups, and surgical time, induced astigmatism, and complications were compared.

Results: Of 32 consecutive patients, there was no significant difference in induced astigmatism or maneuvering between the early learning curve and other groups. The true learning curve was the first three patients. There were three cases where suturing the sclerotomy was necessary: one port in each case, three of 32 cases (9.3%), or three of 96 ports (2.9%).

Conclusion: There were no significant difficulties in surgical maneuvers while performing 20 g sutureless vitrectomy.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus