Abstract
AimTo assess the primary reattachment rate (PARR) in pneumatic retinopexy (PnR) versus pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) meeting the Pneumatic Retinopexy versus Vitrectomy for the Management of Primary Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment Outcomes Randomised Trial (PIVOT) criteria with a single break in detached retina.MethodsA post hoc analysis of two clinical trials. To be included, patients with primary RRD had to meet PIVOT criteria but could have only one break in the detached retina. Patients with additional pathology in the attached retina were included in a secondary analysis. The primary outcome was PARR following PnR versus PPV at 1-year postoperatively.Results162 patients were included. 53% (86/162) underwent PnR and 47% (76/162) had a PPV. 99% (85/86) and 86.8% (66/76) completed the 1-year follow-up visits in the PnR and PPV groups, respectively. PARR was 88.2% (75/85) in the PnR group and 90.9% (60/66) in the PPV group (p=0.6) with a mean postoperative logMAR best-corrected visual acuity of 0.19±0.25 versus 0.34±0.37 (Snellen 20/30 vs 20/44) (p=0.01) each in the PnR and PPV groups, respectively.In an additional analysis of patients who were also allowed to have any pathology in the attached retina, the PARR was 85% (91/107) and 91.6% (66/72) in the PnR and PPV groups, respectively (p=0.18).ConclusionsPnR and PPV provide similar long-term PARR in a substantial proportion of patients meeting PIVOT criteria with only a single break in the detached retina. Therefore, in patients meeting these specific criteria, PnR is an appropriate first-line therapy as it offers superior functional outcomes without compromising PARR.