Primary Retinal Detachment Outcomes Study: summary of reports number 1 to number 18

Purpose of review To highlight the recent work published from the Primary Retinal Detachment Outcomes (PRO) Study Group. Recent findings The PRO database was a large dataset made up of patients with primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachments (RRD) who had surgical repair during 2015. The database was constituted of nearly 3000 eyes from 6 centers across the United States and included 61 vitreoretinal surgeons. Nearly 250 metrics were collected for each patient, creating one of the richest datasets of patients with primary rhegmatogenous detachments and their outcomes. The importance of scleral buckling was demonstrated, particularly for phakic eyes, elderly patients, and those with inferior breaks. 360° laser may result in poorer outcomes. Cystoid macular edema was common, and risk factors were identified. We also found risk factors for vision loss in eyes presenting with good vision. A PRO Score was devised, to predict outcomes based on presenting clinical characteristics. We also identified characteristics of surgeons with the highest single surgery success rates. Overall, there were no major outcome differences between viewing systems, gauges, buckles sutured vs. scleral tunnels, drainage method, and techniques to address proliferative vitreoretinopathy. All incisional techniques were found to be very cost-effective treatment modalities. Summary Numerous studies resulted from the PRO database that significantly added to the literature regarding the repair of primary RRDs in the current era of vitreoretinal surgery.

[1]  Ajay E. Kuriyan,et al.  Predictors of Vision Loss after Surgery for Macula-Sparing Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment , 2022, Current eye research.

[2]  C. Regillo,et al.  Outcomes of Primary Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment Repair in Eyes With Preoperative Grade B or C Proliferative Vitreoretinopathy , 2021, Journal of vitreoretinal diseases.

[3]  C. Regillo,et al.  PRO score: predictive scoring system for visual outcomes after rhegmatogenous retinal detachment repair , 2021, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[4]  W. Smiddy,et al.  COST ANALYSIS OF SCLERAL BUCKLE, PARS PLANA VITRECTOMY, AND PARS PLANA VITRECTOMY WITH SCLERAL BUCKLE FOR RETINAL DETACHMENT REPAIR , 2021, Retina.

[5]  Omesh P Gupta,et al.  Reply to Letter to the Editor: PRO Study Report No. 7: Macular Hole in RRD. , 2021, Ophthalmic surgery, lasers & imaging retina.

[6]  Sean M. Maloney,et al.  Scleral Buckling for Primary Retinal Detachment: Outcomes of Scleral Tunnels versus Scleral Sutures , 2021, Journal of ophthalmic & vision research.

[7]  C. Regillo,et al.  Risk Factors for Presence of Cystoid Macular Edema following Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment Surgery , 2021, Current eye research.

[8]  C. Regillo,et al.  Surgical techniques for primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachments between surgeons with high versus low single surgery success rates , 2021, Acta ophthalmologica.

[9]  C. Regillo,et al.  Comparison of Visual and Anatomic Outcomes Following RRD Surgery Using 23-Gauge Versus 25-Gauge Vitrectomy: PRO Study Report No. 12. , 2021, Ophthalmic surgery, lasers & imaging retina.

[10]  C. Regillo,et al.  RETINAL DETACHMENT WITH INFERIOR RETINAL BREAKS: Primary Vitrectomy Versus Vitrectomy With Scleral Buckle (PRO Study Report No. 9). , 2020, Retina.

[11]  Sean M. Maloney,et al.  Surgical Outcomes of Primary RRD With and Without Concurrent Full-Thickness Macular Hole (PRO Study Report No. 7). , 2020, Ophthalmic surgery, lasers & imaging retina.

[12]  C. Regillo,et al.  Characteristics and Surgical Outcomes of Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment in Older Adults: a Multicenter Comparative Cohort Study. , 2020, Retina.

[13]  D. Eliott,et al.  Posterior Retinotomy vs Perfluorocarbon Liquid to Aid Drainage of Subretinal Fluid During Primary Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment Repair (PRO Study Report No. 10) , 2020, Journal of vitreoretinal diseases.

[14]  Sean M. Maloney,et al.  Prophylactic internal limiting membrane peeling during rhegmatogenous retinal detachment surgery , 2020, Acta ophthalmologica.

[15]  Sean M. Maloney,et al.  Impact of contact versus non-contact wide-angle viewing systems on outcomes of primary retinal detachment repair (PRO study report number 5) , 2020, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[16]  George A. Williams,et al.  Primary Retinal Detachment Outcomes Study: Pseudophakic Retinal Detachment Outcomes , 2020 .

[17]  George A. Williams,et al.  Primary Retinal Detachment Outcomes Study Report Number 2: Phakic Retinal Detachment Outcomes. , 2020, Ophthalmology.

[18]  George A. Williams,et al.  Primary Retinal Detachment Outcomes Study: Methodology and Overall Outcomes-Primary Retinal Detachment Outcomes Study Report Number 1. , 2020, Ophthalmology. Retina.

[19]  D. Eliott,et al.  FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH THE USE OF 360-DEGREE LASER RETINOPEXY DURING PRIMARY VITRECTOMY WITH OR WITHOUT SCLERAL BUCKLE FOR RHEGMATOGENOUS RETINAL DETACHMENT AND IMPACT ON SURGICAL OUTCOMES (PRO STUDY REPORT NUMBER 4). , 2019, Retina.

[20]  John C. Hwang,et al.  Trends in Vitreoretinal Procedures for Medicare Beneficiaries, 2000 to 2014. , 2017, Ophthalmology.

[21]  P. Walter,et al.  Scleral buckling versus primary vitrectomy in rhegmatogenous retinal detachment study (SPR study): Risk assessment of anatomical outcome. SPR study report no. 7 , 2013, Acta ophthalmologica.

[22]  H. Heimann,et al.  Scleral buckling versus primary vitrectomy in rhegmatogenous retinal detachment study (SPR Study): Multiple‐event analysis of risk factors for reoperations. SPR Study report no. 4 , 2011, Acta ophthalmologica.

[23]  H. Flynn,et al.  Primary retinal detachment: scleral buckle or pars plana vitrectomy? , 2006, Current opinion in ophthalmology.

[24]  T. Williamson,et al.  Primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment: 20 years of change , 2001, The British journal of ophthalmology.