ArticleBMJ open ophthalmology2025
Influence of drainage retinotomy on anatomical and visual outcomes of pars plana vitrectomy for primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.
Article in BMJ open ophthalmology, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the influence of drainage retinotomy (DrR) on anatomical and visual outcomes of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for primary uncomplicated rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RD), compared with drainage through pre-existing retinal break (PRB). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Retrospective study on patients treated with PPV for RD. Prospectively collected data were extracted from the Britain & Eire Association of Vitreoretinal Surgeons and European Society of Retina Specialists (EURETINA) RD database, including baseline features, surgical details, and anatomical and functional outcomes. Inclusion criteria were as follows: uncomplicated PPV, gas tamponade, drainage through DrR or PRB, surgeons with >100 cases recorded. Exclusion criteria were as follows: age <16, <2-month follow-up, ocular comorbidity, proliferative vitreoretinopathy ≥grade C, giant retinal tear, tamponade other than gas. Full propensity score matching resulted in matched groups to mitigate confounding bias. Subsequent multivariable linear regression was performed for postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) as dependent variable, and Firth penalised logistic regression with DrR, single-surgery anatomical success (SSAS), epiretinal membrane (ERM) and macular fold as dependent dichotomised variables on matched data.
resultsOf 12 504 eyes extracted, 4175 were included. Of these, 3432 (82.2%) had PRB drainage (non-DrR group) and 743 (17.8%) a DrR (DrR group). Final median (IQR) BCVA was 0.18 (0.14-0.48) in the non-DrR group and 0.20 (0.18-0.48) in the DrR group (p=0.072). SSAS rate was 93.4% and 91% (OR 0.71 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.95)) and postoperative ERM rate 1.6% and 4.2% (OR 2.63 (95% CI 1.68 to 4.10)) in the non-DrR and DrR groups, respectively. On multivariable regression, DrR was associated with postoperative ERM (p=0.011), but not with final BCVA, SSAS and macular folds (p=0.633, 0.149 and 0.085, respectively).
conclusionOur study confirmed the association between DrR and increased risk of developing ERM; however, DrR does not appear to impact significantly on other outcomes.
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.