Retrospective cohort study shows increased risk of vascular occlusions in patients after vitrectomy, highlighting implications for monitoring ocular ischemic events.
Objective To assess the incidence of post–vitrectomy ocular ischemic events, including retinal artery occlusion (RAO), retinal vein occlusion (RVO), and non-arteritic ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION). Methods This retrospective cohort study examined 120,350 patients who underwent vitrectomy. Using a multicenter healthcare database, patients with a CPT code for any vitrectomy procedure were assessed for subsequent ocular ischemic events. A follow-up analysis of 510,915 patients was performed to determine the risk attributable to vitrectomy versus clinical characteristics. Exclusion criteria included history of prior ocular ischemic events and less than 6 months of follow up. Results The first post-operative month had a significantly higher risk of vascular occlusions compared to the 6–12-month period, with incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of 9.69 (95% CI: 6.9–13.7) for RAO, 11.43 (95% CI: 9.3–14.1) for RVO, and 8.75 (95% CI: 5.2–14.7) for NAION. The IRR for overall ischemic events was also increased during the first month following vitrectomy at 10.7 (95% CI: 9.0–12.7) and remained elevated up to 6 months later with an IRR of 1.49 (95% CI: 1.2–1.8) for the 3–6-month period compared to 6–12-months postoperatively. A separate multivariate analysis revealed that the risk of overall ischemic events was most correlated to vitrectomy (hazard ratio [HR] 3.32, 95% CI: 3.10–3.57) over multiple variables including cataract surgery (HR 1.49, 95% CI: 1.42–1.56) and nicotine use (HR 1.15, 95% CI: 1.08–1.22). Conclusions Vitrectomy is correlated with significantly increased risk of ocular ischemic events, particularly within the first month following surgery. This risk gradually declines but remains elevated up to 6 months postoperatively.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alshaikhsalama et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: