一项前瞻性随机对照研究:25G 2万刀/分钟和1万刀/分钟玻璃体切割的性能、安全性和效率比较

IF 2.4 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Shing Chuen Chow, Jeffrey Man Yeung Lo, Mehnaz Quddus, Qing Li, Wai Ching Lam, Nicholas Siu Kay Fung
{"title":"一项前瞻性随机对照研究:25G 2万刀/分钟和1万刀/分钟玻璃体切割的性能、安全性和效率比较","authors":"Shing Chuen Chow, Jeffrey Man Yeung Lo, Mehnaz Quddus, Qing Li, Wai Ching Lam, Nicholas Siu Kay Fung","doi":"10.1186/s40942-024-00613-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of 20,000 cuts per minute (cpm) with 10,000 cpm in vitreous cutters.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective, parallel, single masked randomized control trial comparing the 25 gauge 20,000 cpm HYPERVIT Dual Blade from Alcon Laboratories, Fort Worth, TX, USA and 10,000 cpm ULTRAVIT vitrectomy cutter from Alcon Laboratories, Inc, Fort Worth, TX. Standard T-test by SPSS version 27 was used to compare efficiency and safety between two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total 72 patients were recruited for the study and among them 71 patients completed the study. This study did not show any significant difference between 20,000 cpm probe and 10,000 cpm probe (p value = 0.347) for the core vitrectomy duration in all included eyes. The mean of core vitrectomy time was 269.28 s in the 25 gauge 20,000 cpm group and 289.44 s in the 25 gauge 10,000 cpm group. However, by comparing the two systems operated on epiretinal membrane eyes, 20,000 cpm probe had a significantly shorter mean core vitrectomy time than 10,000 cpm group (P = 0.03). The majority of all the patients had no intraoperative retinal tear (98.6.8%) and post-operative retinal tear (95.8%). There were no intraoperative iatrogenic breaks, and 3 postoperative retinal tears with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) were documented. All the retinal tears belongs to the 20,000 cpm group but no significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of retinal tear and complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>25-gauge 20,000 cpm Hypervit dual blade showed a faster trend in vitrectomy time although this was not statistically significant in all included eyes. By comparing vitrectomy time operated on epiretinal membrane eyes, a significant shorter time was found in 25-gauge 20,000 cpm. With more efficient and faster vitrectomy systems, the effect of surgeon factor likely plays a larger role. Our study suggest that the two devices may have a similar efficacy and safety. However, further studies may be needed to compare the core vitrectomy time between them after excluding the surgeon factor influence.</p>","PeriodicalId":14289,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Retina and Vitreous","volume":"11 1","pages":"45"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11998420/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance, safety and efficiency comparison between a 25G 20,000 and a 10,000 cuts per minute vitrectomy: a prospective randomized control study.\",\"authors\":\"Shing Chuen Chow, Jeffrey Man Yeung Lo, Mehnaz Quddus, Qing Li, Wai Ching Lam, Nicholas Siu Kay Fung\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40942-024-00613-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of 20,000 cuts per minute (cpm) with 10,000 cpm in vitreous cutters.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective, parallel, single masked randomized control trial comparing the 25 gauge 20,000 cpm HYPERVIT Dual Blade from Alcon Laboratories, Fort Worth, TX, USA and 10,000 cpm ULTRAVIT vitrectomy cutter from Alcon Laboratories, Inc, Fort Worth, TX. Standard T-test by SPSS version 27 was used to compare efficiency and safety between two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total 72 patients were recruited for the study and among them 71 patients completed the study. This study did not show any significant difference between 20,000 cpm probe and 10,000 cpm probe (p value = 0.347) for the core vitrectomy duration in all included eyes. The mean of core vitrectomy time was 269.28 s in the 25 gauge 20,000 cpm group and 289.44 s in the 25 gauge 10,000 cpm group. However, by comparing the two systems operated on epiretinal membrane eyes, 20,000 cpm probe had a significantly shorter mean core vitrectomy time than 10,000 cpm group (P = 0.03). The majority of all the patients had no intraoperative retinal tear (98.6.8%) and post-operative retinal tear (95.8%). There were no intraoperative iatrogenic breaks, and 3 postoperative retinal tears with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) were documented. All the retinal tears belongs to the 20,000 cpm group but no significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of retinal tear and complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>25-gauge 20,000 cpm Hypervit dual blade showed a faster trend in vitrectomy time although this was not statistically significant in all included eyes. By comparing vitrectomy time operated on epiretinal membrane eyes, a significant shorter time was found in 25-gauge 20,000 cpm. With more efficient and faster vitrectomy systems, the effect of surgeon factor likely plays a larger role. Our study suggest that the two devices may have a similar efficacy and safety. However, further studies may be needed to compare the core vitrectomy time between them after excluding the surgeon factor influence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14289,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Retina and Vitreous\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"45\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11998420/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Retina and Vitreous\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40942-024-00613-w\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Retina and Vitreous","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40942-024-00613-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究的目的是比较玻璃体切割器每分钟切割2万次和每分钟切割1万次的安全性和有效性。方法:这是一项前瞻性、平行、单盲随机对照试验,比较美国沃斯堡爱尔康实验室生产的25号20000 cpm HYPERVIT双刀片和美国沃斯堡爱尔康实验室生产的10000 cpm ULTRAVIT玻璃体切割刀具。采用SPSS 27版标准t检验比较两组之间的效率和安全性。结果:共招募了72例患者,其中71例患者完成了研究。本研究显示,在所有纳入的眼中,20,000 cpm探针与10,000 cpm探针在核心玻璃体切除术持续时间上无显著差异(p值= 0.347)。25口径20000 cpm组的平均玻璃体切割时间为269.28 s, 25口径10000 cpm组的平均时间为289.44 s。然而,通过比较两种系统在视网膜前膜眼上的操作,20,000 cpm探针的平均玻璃体切割时间明显短于10,000 cpm组(P = 0.03)。大多数患者术中无视网膜撕裂(98.6.8%),术后无视网膜撕裂(95.8%)。术中无医源性骨折,术后视网膜撕裂伴孔源性视网膜脱离(RRD) 3例。视网膜撕裂均属于20,000 cpm组,但两组在视网膜撕裂及并发症方面无显著差异。结论:25号20000cpm Hypervit双刀片在玻璃体切割时间上有更快的趋势,尽管在所有纳入的眼睛中没有统计学意义。通过比较视网膜前膜眼的玻璃体切除术时间,发现25-口径2万cpm的玻璃体切除术时间明显缩短。随着玻璃体切割系统的效率和速度的提高,外科医生的因素可能会发挥更大的作用。我们的研究表明,这两种装置可能具有相似的疗效和安全性。然而,在排除手术因素影响后,比较两者的玻璃体核心切除术时间可能需要进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Performance, safety and efficiency comparison between a 25G 20,000 and a 10,000 cuts per minute vitrectomy: a prospective randomized control study.

Performance, safety and efficiency comparison between a 25G 20,000 and a 10,000 cuts per minute vitrectomy: a prospective randomized control study.

Background: The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of 20,000 cuts per minute (cpm) with 10,000 cpm in vitreous cutters.

Methods: This was a prospective, parallel, single masked randomized control trial comparing the 25 gauge 20,000 cpm HYPERVIT Dual Blade from Alcon Laboratories, Fort Worth, TX, USA and 10,000 cpm ULTRAVIT vitrectomy cutter from Alcon Laboratories, Inc, Fort Worth, TX. Standard T-test by SPSS version 27 was used to compare efficiency and safety between two groups.

Results: In total 72 patients were recruited for the study and among them 71 patients completed the study. This study did not show any significant difference between 20,000 cpm probe and 10,000 cpm probe (p value = 0.347) for the core vitrectomy duration in all included eyes. The mean of core vitrectomy time was 269.28 s in the 25 gauge 20,000 cpm group and 289.44 s in the 25 gauge 10,000 cpm group. However, by comparing the two systems operated on epiretinal membrane eyes, 20,000 cpm probe had a significantly shorter mean core vitrectomy time than 10,000 cpm group (P = 0.03). The majority of all the patients had no intraoperative retinal tear (98.6.8%) and post-operative retinal tear (95.8%). There were no intraoperative iatrogenic breaks, and 3 postoperative retinal tears with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) were documented. All the retinal tears belongs to the 20,000 cpm group but no significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of retinal tear and complications.

Conclusions: 25-gauge 20,000 cpm Hypervit dual blade showed a faster trend in vitrectomy time although this was not statistically significant in all included eyes. By comparing vitrectomy time operated on epiretinal membrane eyes, a significant shorter time was found in 25-gauge 20,000 cpm. With more efficient and faster vitrectomy systems, the effect of surgeon factor likely plays a larger role. Our study suggest that the two devices may have a similar efficacy and safety. However, further studies may be needed to compare the core vitrectomy time between them after excluding the surgeon factor influence.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
81
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Retina and Vitreous focuses on the ophthalmic subspecialty of vitreoretinal disorders. The journal presents original articles on new approaches to diagnosis, outcomes of clinical trials, innovations in pharmacological therapy and surgical techniques, as well as basic science advances that impact clinical practice. Topical areas include, but are not limited to: -Imaging of the retina, choroid and vitreous -Innovations in optical coherence tomography (OCT) -Small-gauge vitrectomy, retinal detachment, chromovitrectomy -Electroretinography (ERG), microperimetry, other functional tests -Intraocular tumors -Retinal pharmacotherapy & drug delivery -Diabetic retinopathy & other vascular diseases -Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) & other macular entities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信