Effect of Face-Down Positioning vs Support-the-Break Positioning After Macula-Involving Retinal Detachment Repair: The PostRD Randomized Clinical Trial | Ophthalmology | JAMA Ophthalmology | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 35.170.64.36. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Mitry  D, Williams  L, Charteris  DG, Fleck  BW, Wright  AF, Campbell  H.  Population-based estimate of the sibling recurrence risk ratio for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.   Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52(5):2551-2555. doi:10.1167/iovs.10-6375 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Jackson  TL, Donachie  PHJ, Sallam  A, Sparrow  JM, Johnston  RL.  United Kingdom National Ophthalmology Database study of vitreoretinal surgery: report 3, retinal detachment.   Ophthalmology. 2014;121(3):643-648. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.07.015 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Dell’Omo  R, Mura  M, Lesnik Oberstein  SY, Bijl  H, Tan  HS.  Early simultaneous fundus autofluorescence and optical coherence tomography features after pars plana vitrectomy for primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.   Retina. 2012;32(4):719-728. doi:10.1097/IAE.0b013e31822c293e PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Okamoto  F, Sugiura  Y, Okamoto  Y, Hiraoka  T, Oshika  T.  Metamorphopsia and optical coherence tomography findings after rhegmatogenous retinal detachment surgery.   Am J Ophthalmol. 2014;157(1):214-220.e1. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2013.08.007 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
van de Put  MAJ, Vehof  J, Hooymans  JMM, Los  LI.  Postoperative metamorphopsia in macula-off rhegmatogenous retinal detachment: associations with visual function, vision related quality of life, and optical coherence tomography findings.   PLoS One. 2015;10(4):e0120543. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0120543 PubMedGoogle Scholar
6.
Lina  G, Xuemin  Q, Qinmei  W, Lijun  S.  Vision-related quality of life, metamorphopsia, and stereopsis after successful surgery for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.   Eye (Lond). 2016;30(1):40-45. doi:10.1038/eye.2015.171 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Shiragami  C, Shiraga  F, Yamaji  H,  et al.  Unintentional displacement of the retina after standard vitrectomy for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.   Ophthalmology. 2010;117(1):86-92.e1. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.06.025 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Dell’omo  R, Cifariello  F, Dell’omo  E,  et al.  Influence of retinal vessel printings on metamorphopsia and retinal architectural abnormalities in eyes with idiopathic macular epiretinal membrane.   Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(12):7803-7811. doi:10.1167/iovs.13-12817 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Lee  E, Williamson  TH, Hysi  P,  et al.  Macular displacement following rhegmatogenous retinal detachment repair.   Br J Ophthalmol. 2013;97(10):1297-1302. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-303637 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Martínez-Castillo  VJ, García-Arumí  J, Boixadera  A.  Pars plana vitrectomy alone for the management of pseudophakic rhegmatogenous retinal detachment with only inferior breaks.   Ophthalmology. 2016;123(7):1563-1569. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2016.03.032 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Chen  X, Yan  Y, Hong  L, Zhu  L.  A comparison of strict face-down positioning with adjustable positioning after pars plana vitrectomy and gas tamponade for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.   Retina. 2015;35(5):892-898. doi:10.1097/IAE.0000000000000413 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Dell’Omo  R, Semeraro  F, Guerra  G,  et al.  Short-time prone posturing is well-tolerated and reduces the rate of unintentional retinal displacement in elderly patients operated on for retinal detachment.   BMC Surg. 2013;13(suppl 2):S55. doi:10.1186/1471-2482-13-S2-S55 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Shiragami  C, Fukuda  K, Yamaji  H, Morita  M, Shiraga  F.  A method to decrease the frequency of unintentional slippage after vitrectomy for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.   Retina. 2015;35(4):758-763. doi:10.1097/IAE.0000000000000383 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
World Medical Association.  World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects.   JAMA. 2013;310(20):2191-2194. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.281053PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
McGowan  G, Yorston  D, Strang  NC, Manahilov  V.  D-CHART: a novel method of measuring metamorphopsia in epiretinal membrane and macular hole.   Retina. 2016;36(4):703-708. doi:10.1097/IAE.0000000000000778 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
16.
Wickham  L, Bunce  C, Wong  D, McGurn  D, Charteris  DG.  Randomized controlled trial of combined 5-Fluorouracil and low-molecular-weight heparin in the management of unselected rhegmatogenous retinal detachments undergoing primary vitrectomy.   Ophthalmology. 2007;114(4):698-704. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.08.042 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
Heimann  H, Bartz-Schmidt  KU, Bornfeld  N, Weiss  C, Hilgers  RD, Foerster  MH; Scleral Buckling versus Primary Vitrectomy in Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment Study Group.  Scleral buckling versus primary vitrectomy in rhegmatogenous retinal detachment: a prospective randomized multicenter clinical study.   Ophthalmology. 2007;114(12):2142-2154. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.09.013 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
Martínez-Castillo  V, Boixadera  A, Verdugo  A, García-Arumí  J.  Pars plana vitrectomy alone for the management of inferior breaks in pseudophakic retinal detachment without facedown position.   Ophthalmology. 2005;112(7):1222-1226. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.12.046 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Peiretti  E, Nasini  F, Buschini  E,  et al.  Optical coherence tomography evaluation of patients with macula-off retinal detachment after different postoperative posturing: a randomized pilot study.   Acta Ophthalmol. 2017;95(5):e379-e384. doi:10.1111/aos.13397 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
McBain  HB, Au  CK, Hancox  J,  et al.  The impact of strabismus on quality of life in adults with and without diplopia: a systematic review.   Surv Ophthalmol. 2014;59(2):185-191. doi:10.1016/j.survophthal.2013.04.001 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
21.
Ugarte  M, Williamson  TH.  Horizontal and vertical micropsia following macula-off rhegmatogenous retinal-detachment surgical repair.   Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2006;244(11):1545-1548. doi:10.1007/s00417-006-0290-x PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
Dell’Omo  R, Scupola  A, Viggiano  D,  et al.  Incidence and factors influencing retinal displacement in eyes treated for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment with vitrectomy and gas or silicone oil.   Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2017;58(6):BIO191-BIO199. doi:10.1167/iovs.17-21466 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    Original Investigation
    April 16, 2020

    Effect of Face-Down Positioning vs Support-the-Break Positioning After Macula-Involving Retinal Detachment Repair: The PostRD Randomized Clinical Trial

    Author Affiliations
    • 1Department of Ophthalmology, Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom
    • 2Tennent Institute of Ophthalmology, Gartnavel Hospital, Glasgow, United Kingdom
    • 3Unit of Medical Statistics, Faculty of Life Sciences, King’s College London School of Population Health & Environmental Sciences, London, United Kingdom
    JAMA Ophthalmol. 2020;138(6):634-642. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2020.0997
    Key Points

    Question  Does face-down positioning after macula-involving retinal detachment repair reduce retinal displacement or distortion postoperatively?

    Findings  In this randomized clinical trial of 262 patients with macula-involving retinal detachment, face-down positioning led to a reduction in the rate of postoperative retinal displacement in comparison with support-the-break positioning (42% vs 58%), although no difference in visual acuity or distortion was found.

    Meaning  Findings of this study suggest that face-down positioning reduces retinal displacement after macula-involving retinal detachment repair.

    Abstract

    Importance  A lack of consensus exists with regard to the optimal positioning regimen for patients after macula-involving retinal detachment (RD) repair.

    Objective  To evaluate the effect of face-down positioning vs support-the-break positioning on retinal displacement and distortion after macula-involving RD repair.

    Design, Setting, and Participants  A prospective 6-month single-masked randomized clinical trial was conducted at a multicenter tertiary referral setting from May 16, 2016, to May 1, 2018. Inclusion criteria were fovea-involving rhegmatogenous RD; central visual loss within 14 days; patients undergoing primary vitrectomy and gas surgery, under local anesthetic; patients able to give written informed consent; and 18 years old and older. Analysis was conducted following a modified intention-to-treat principle, with patients experiencing a redetachment or failure to attach the macula being excluded from analysis.

    Interventions  Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive face-down positioning or support-the-break positioning for a 24-hour period postoperatively. Positioning compliance was not monitored.

    Main Outcomes and Measures  The proportion of patients with retinal displacement on autofluorescence imaging at 6 months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included proportion of patients with displacement at 2 months; amplitude of displacement at 2 and 6 months; corrected Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study visual acuity; objective Distortion Scores; and quality of life questionnaire scores at 6 months.

    Results  Of the 262 randomized patients, 239 were analyzed (171 male [71.5%]; mean [SD] age, 60.8 [9.8] years). At 6 months, retinal displacement was detected in 42 of 100 (42%) in the face-down positioning group vs 58 of 103 (56%) in the support-the-break positioning group (odds ratio, 1.77; 95%CI, 1.01-3.11; P = .04). The degree of displacement was lower in the face-down group. Groups were similar in corrected visual acuity (face-down, 74 letters vs support-the-break, 75 letters), objective D Chart Distortion Scores (range: 0, no distortion to 41.6, severe distortion; with face-down at 4.5 vs support-the-break at 4.2), and quality of life scores (face-down 89.3 vs support-the-break 89.0) at 2 and 6 months. Retinal redetachment rate was similar in both groups (face-down group, 12.2% and support-the-break group, 13.7%). Retinal folds were less common in the face-down positioning group vs the support-the-break positioning group (5.3% vs 13.5%, respectively; odds ratio, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.2-7.4; P = .03). Binocular diplopia was more common in the support-the-break group compared with the face-down positioning group (7.6% vs 1.5%, respectively; odds ratio, 5.3; 95% CI, 1.3-24.6; P = .03). Amplitude of displacement was associated with worse visual acuity (r = −0.5; P < .001) and distortion (r = 0.28; P = .008).

    Conclusions and Relevance  In this study, findings suggest that face-down positioning was associated with a reduction in the rate and amplitude of postoperative retinal displacement after macula-involving RD repair and with a reduction in binocular diplopia. No association was found with visual acuity or postoperative distortion.

    Trial Registration  ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02748538

    ×