ArticleCase reports in ophthalmology
Spontaneous Retinal Reattachment following Multiple Vitreoretinal Interventions: Case Report.
Article in Case reports in ophthalmology. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The aim of the study was to document and analyze a rare case of spontaneous retinal reattachment in a patient after successive unsuccessful vitreoretinal surgeries and to explore potential mechanisms contributing to this unexpected outcome. Case Presentation: A 61-year-old patient with a history of high myopia presented with a rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. After undergoing multiple vitreoretinal procedures, including pars plana vitrectomy with silicone oil tamponade, anatomical reattachment was not achieved, and the patient developed complex retinal detachment associated with myopic foveoschisis. Surprisingly, spontaneous reattachment of the retina was observed during routine follow-up. Comprehensive ocular examination, optical coherence tomography (OCT), and fundus autofluorescence imaging were utilized to confirm and document the retinal status. A thorough review of patient history, surgical reports, and postoperative imaging was performed to discern potential contributory factors. The patient's retina remained attached for 12 months after the last intervention without additional surgical or medical treatment. OCT images revealed normalization of retinal architecture with reestablishment of the foveal contour and partial recovery of visual acuity. No signs of proliferative vitreoretinopathy or other commonly associated complications were observed. Immunological assays and genetic testing ruled out systemic conditions that could predispose to spontaneous reattachment. Conclusion: This case represents a remarkable instance of spontaneous retinal reattachment without surgical intervention after multiple failed procedures. The mechanisms underlying this phenomenon remain speculative; however, they may involve delayed postoperative cellular proliferation and migration, subtle intraocular pressure changes, or unrecognized vitreous traction resolution. Further investigation into similar cases may provide insights into the natural history of retinal detachment and potential self-resolving dynamics, which could inform future therapeutic strategies.
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.