Peripheral PRP in the Operating Room vs Standard Clinic PRP for the Initial Treatment of PDR

Le résumé fourni par la source

Purpose: To compare the long-term outcomes of standard panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) performed in the operating room (OR) with peripheral PRP performed in the clinic in treatment-naïve patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). Methods: Consecutive cases from 2017 to 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Exclusion criteria included previous PRP, pars plana vitrectomy performed at the time of the initial PRP, PRP performed in another setting within 3 months of the initial treatment, a documented plan for future PRP at the time of the initial treatment, and less than 3 years of follow-up. Negative binomial regressions were used to compare the number of subsequent interventions between the 2 groups and t tests to compare the visual acuity (VA) outcomes. Results: Of the 961 eyes of 679 patients screened, 82 eyes of 53 patients met the inclusion criteria. The initial PRP was performed in the OR (OR cohort) in 57 eyes of 38 patients and in the clinic (clinic cohort) in 25 eyes of 15 patients. The OR cohort had a mean of 0.4 subsequent surgeries and 0.8 subsequent PRP treatments and the clinic cohort, 0.8 subsequent surgeries ( P < .05) and 1.8 subsequent PRP treatments ( P < .05). No significant between-group difference was found in the VA outcomes over the long-term follow-up (mean, 44.2 months). Conclusions: Peripheral PRP performed in the OR resulted in fewer subsequent interventions than standard PRP in the clinic and may afford better control of PDR.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.