Dataset Information

Comparison of outcomes between modified double-flanged sutureless scleral fixation and conventional sutured scleral fixation.

ABSTRACT: This retrospective study aimed to compare the outcomes of modified double-flanged sutureless scleral fixation versus sutured scleral fixation. Medical records of 65 eyes from 65 patients who underwent double-flanged scleral fixation (flange group) or conventional scleral fixation (suture group) between 2021 and 2022 were reviewed. Visual and refractive outcomes, as well as postoperative complications, were compared 1, 2, and 6 months after surgery. We included 31 eyes in the flange group and 34 eyes in the suture group. At 6 months postoperatively, the flange group showed better uncorrected visual acuity (0.251 ± 0.328 vs. 0.418 ± 0.339 logMAR, P = 0.041) and a smaller myopic shift (- 0.74 ± 0.93 vs. - 1.33 ± 1.15 diopter, P = 0.007) compared to the suture group. The flange group did not experience any instances of iris capture, while the suture group had iris capture in 10 eyes (29.4%; P < 0.001). In the flange group, all intraocular lenses remained centered, whereas in the suture group, they were decentered in 8 eyes (23.5%; P = 0.005). The double-flanged technique not only prevented iris capture and decentration of the intraocular lens but also reduced myopic shift by enhancing the stability of the intraocular lens.

SUBMITTER: Kim J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11245608 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of outcomes between modified double-flanged sutureless scleral fixation and conventional sutured scleral fixation.

Kim Jinsoo J Lee Phil Young PY Park Min Seon MS Cho Bum-Joo BJ Kwon Soonil S

Scientific reports 20240712 1

This retrospective study aimed to compare the outcomes of modified double-flanged sutureless scleral fixation versus sutured scleral fixation. Medical records of 65 eyes from 65 patients who underwent double-flanged scleral fixation (flange group) or conventional scleral fixation (suture group) between 2021 and 2022 were reviewed. Visual and refractive outcomes, as well as postoperative complications, were compared 1, 2, and 6 months after surgery. We included 31 eyes in the flange group and 34 ...[more]

PMID: 38997328

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceSutureless gastroschisis repair offers an alternative to the traditional sutured method and has been associated with decreased intubation time. Published study results are inconsistent regarding the advantages of sutureless closure.ObjectiveTo compare the clinical outcomes of sutureless and sutured gastroschisis repair.Design, setting, and participantsA single-center cohort review was performed of all consecutive patients (n = 97) who underwent gastroschisis repair from February 1, 2007, to April 30, 2017, at the University of California, San Francisco. Patients' medical records were evaluated for clinical characteristics and outcomes. Cases with incomplete data during initial hospitalization were excluded.Main outcomes and measuresLength of hospital stay, time to full enteral feeds, total parenteral nutrition duration, days requiring intravenous analgesia, days intubated, wound infection rate, antibiotic treatment duration, rate of umbilical hernias that required an operation, and readmission rate.ResultsIn total, 97 patients (47 [48%] were female and 50 [52%] were male with a mean [SD] age of 2.8 [2.8] days) underwent gastroschisis repair, of which 7 were excluded for incomplete medical record. Of the 90 patients included in the study, 50 (56%) underwent sutured closure and 40 (44%) underwent sutureless closure. No statistical difference was found between the sutured and sutureless groups in length of hospital stay (mean [SD] days, 43.9 [40.4] vs 36.7 [21.2]; P = .71), time to full enteral feeds (mean [SD] days, 31.4 [20.2] vs 27.9 [17.3]; P = .22), total parenteral nutrition duration (mean [SD] days, 33.5 [29.8] vs 27.4 [18.2]; P = .23), wound infection rates (14 [28%] vs 10 [25%]; P = .81), and readmission rates (5 [10%] vs 7 [18%]; P = .36). The sutureless group, compared with the sutured group, had substantially fewer days receiving antibiotics (mean [SD], 7.2 [6.4] vs 12.4 [13.2]; P = .003), fewer days intubated (mean [SD], 2.8 [3.3] vs 6.8 [1.3]; P = .001), fewer days receiving intravenous analgesia (mean [SD], 4.2 [4.0] vs 7.1 [4.5]; P = .003), and fewer patients that required silo reduction (25 [63%] vs 48 [96%]; P < .001). Sutureless closures, compared with the sutured technique, had considerably more umbilical hernias requiring surgical repair (5 [13%] vs 0; P = .02).Conclusions and relevanceSutureless repair of gastroschisis appears to be associated with a statistically significant reduction in mechanical ventilation duration and pain medication requirements but may increase umbilical hernia risk. Multicenter randomized clinical trials are necessary to determine the true advantages of the sutureless approach.

Dataset Information

Comparison of outcomes between modified double-flanged sutureless scleral fixation and conventional sutured scleral fixation.

Publications

Comparison of outcomes between modified double-flanged sutureless scleral fixation and conventional sutured scleral fixation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets