ReviewInternational journal of ophthalmology2026
How much vitrectomy is enough? A narrative review.
Review in International journal of ophthalmology, 2026. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The optimal extent of vitreous removal in modern vitreoretinal surgery remains controversial. While extensive vitrectomy has traditionally been performed to minimize traction and reduce postoperative complications, emerging evidence challenges its routine use across all indications. This narrative review critically evaluates whether extensive vitreous removal provides superior outcomes compared to limited, vitreous-sparing approaches. Current data do not demonstrate a consistent or clinically meaningful advantage of extensive vitrectomy. Although broader vitreous removal may reduce residual traction, it is associated with increased intraoperative manipulation and a higher risk of iatrogenic retinal injury, particularly during peripheral vitreous shaving. In contrast, limited vitrectomy appears sufficient in macular surgery and selected cases of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment, especially with advances in microincisional techniques, high-speed cutters and improved visualization systems. In complex tractional diseases, however, more extensive dissection may still be required. Overall, the available evidence supports a selective, pathology-driven approach rather than routine extensive vitreous removal, reflecting a shift toward more precise and minimally invasive vitreoretinal surgery.
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.