RESUMO
Introduction. To evaluate the impact of the eye lens status and oil side effects on the outcome of vitreoretinal surgery in retinal detachment with proliferative vitreoretinopathy (PVR) and a temporary silicone oil tamponade (SOT). Methods. 101 eyes were analyzed retrospectively and 103 eyes prospectively in regard to their retinal reattachment success rate and key factors for the outcome. Subgroup analysis of 27 eyes with Scheimpflug lens photography (SLP) before and after retinal reattachment service with SOT was performed. For SLP (65% phakic eyes) a Pentacam densitometry reference body with 3 mm diameter was chosen and 3 segments (anterior/mid/posterior) were evaluated separately after a quality check. Results. The retinal reattachment rate was highest in the prospective pseudophakic group (p = 0.039). Lens transparency loss occurred earlier in middle aged patients than in younger patients. Besides the nucleus, layers posterior and anterior to it showed specific transparency changes. The emulsification rate was higher when eyes had been operated on in the anterior chamber before retinal reattachment service. Conclusions. Retinal reattachment surgery seems to benefit from preoperative cataract removal. We found significant lens changes in the nucleus as well as in the layers anterior and posterior to it. This corresponds to the histology of the lens epithelium published before.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of the virtual reality training simulator Eyesi to prepare surgeons for performing pars plana vitrectomies and its potential to predict the surgeons' performance. METHODS: In a preparation phase, four participating vitreoretinal surgeons performed repeated simulator training with predefined tasks. If a surgeon was assigned to perform a vitrectomy for the management of complex retinal detachment after a surgical break of at least 60 hours it was randomly decided whether a warmup training on the simulator was required (n = 9) or not (n = 12). Performance at the simulator was measured using the built-in scoring metrics. The surgical performance was determined by two blinded observers who analyzed the video-recorded interventions. One of them repeated the analysis to check for intra-observer consistency. The surgical performance of the interventions with and without simulator training was compared. In addition, for the surgeries with simulator training, the simulator performance was compared to the performance in the operating room. RESULTS: Comparing each surgeon's performance with and without warmup trainingshowed a significant effect of warmup training onto the final outcome in the operating room. For the surgeries that were preceeded by the warmup procedure, the performance at the simulator was compared with the operating room performance. We found that there is a significant relation. The governing factor of low scores in the simulator were iatrogenic retinal holes, bleedings and lens damage. Surgeons who caused minor damage in the simulation also performed well in the operating room. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the large variation of conditions, the effect of a warmup training as well as a relation between the performance at the simulator and in the operating room was found with statistical significance. Simulator training is able to serve as a warmup to increase the average performance.
