ArticleInternational journal of retina and vitreous2022
A novel approach to sclerotomy closure in pars plana vitrectomy: a pilot study.
Article in International journal of retina and vitreous, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMethods of sclerotomy closure following a vitrectomy, including the use of sutures, have been associated with complications such as inflammation, foreign body sensation, and infection. Here, we test an innovative approach to scleral wound closure following pars plana vitrectomy that involves plugging the wound. We investigated several materials with the intent of using products that were either already approved by the FDA for other types of procedures or were biocompatible patient-derived materials.
methodsWe examined whether scleral wounds could be sealed by a clot or internal "plug" rather than a suture or an external adhesive. We tested patient-derived materials (platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and whole blood) as well as polyethylene glycol (PEG) sealant. Whole blood and PRP were prevented from clotting prematurely using sodium citrate, and were clotted for the study with thrombin. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) sealant was prepared according to manufacturer's recommendations. We used fresh-frozen cadaveric porcine eyes. We tested several methods to form plugs using the above materials, as well as various methods to deliver the plugs into the sclerotomy incisions. We used a novel technique of manual vitrectomy. Successfully generated and implanted clots were tested for efficacy with the Seidel test.
resultsPolyethylene glycol (PEG) sealant fractured during our attempts at molding and inserting the plug. In contrast, both whole blood and PRP yielded successful plugs for insertion. We molded a whole blood clot plug by allowing it to clot inside a 20-gauge angiocath catheter and we successfully delivered it through a 23G trocar. At baseline, no wound leakage was apparent. However, the whole blood clot dislodged during the Seidel test. We successfully molded and delivered a PRP clot plug using a tapered 2-20 μl pipette tip, using MAXGrip Forceps to push it through into the wound. No scleral wound leakage was noted at our baseline physiologic infusion pressure. Furthermore, the PRP clot plug prevented scleral wound leakage up to a pressure of 60 mmHg and was confirmed with the Seidel test.
conclusionOur findings suggest that insertion of a clot plug made from either whole blood or PRP may be an effective strategy for scleral wound closure following pars plana vitrectomy. Further testing in preclinical models is warranted to further refine the materials and methods, since this appears to have the potential to improve the closure of the scleral wounds after pars plana vitrectomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.