[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.158.83.210. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Citations 0
Letters
Aug 2011

Pneumatic Retinopexy

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Retina Service, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Eye Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Arch Ophthalmol. 2011;129(8):1110-1111. doi:10.1001/archophthalmol.2011.206

In their article,1 Sinawat et al compared the success rate of pneumatic retinopexy (PR) when performed with 0.3 mL of air vs 0.3 mL of perfluoropropane. One of the factors investigated was the single-procedure reattachment rate. The perfluoropropane group was found to have a single-procedure reattachment rate of 73% compared with 60.3% for the air group. This result was not statistically significant, though there was a difference in the rate of success between the 2 groups, with a trend toward perfluoropropane being more efficacious. The air group (39.7%), however, required significantly more injections than the perfluoropropane group (27%), indicating that an inadequately sized bubble is typically delivered into the eye when treating with air, using their method.

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×