Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of and to compare vitrectomy performed with 25-gauge or 27-gauge instrumentation for macular surgery by assessing the surgical duration, wound closure, and complication rate using a systematic approach to wound closure. Methods: In this retrospective chart review, 125 25-gauge and 125 27-gauge consecutive small-gauge vitrectomy surgeries for epiretinal membrane, macular hole, vitreomacular adhesion, or a combination were analyzed during and immediately after surgery. Wound closure was performed using a systematic protocol. Results: Baseline characteristics were not statistically different between the 2 groups. The surgical duration was similar with 25-gauge vitrectomy and 27-gauge vitrectomy ( P = .07). Although spontaneous wound closure was common in both groups, it was more common in the 27-gauge group ( P = .22). Intraoperative and postoperative complications were uncommon in both groups. Conclusions: Findings show that 27-gauge vitrectomy is a safe, effective alternative to the more commonly used 25-gauge vitrectomy for macular surgery. Less manipulation was required to achieve wound closure with 27-gauge vitrectomy using a standardized wound-closure protocol. Smaller 27-gauge vitrectomy did not increase surgical time or complications over 25-gauge vitrectomy for macular surgery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Christensen et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: