content top

Anatomical Results

Left Right
The anatomical result after the first treatment was the resolution of the sub and intra retinal fluid.

The anatomical result after the first treatment was the resolution of the sub and intra retinal fluid.

The anatomical results in terms of resolution of the sub retinal fluid was overall encouraging. A success was judged present in 120 cases. The time for resolution is 5 to 6 months in most of the cases. 28 cases were not successful and  because presented either no change, or an increase or a temporary resolution and than reappearance of fluid.

The anatomical results in terms of resolution of the sub retinal fluid was overall encouraging. A success was judged present in 120 cases. The time for resolution is 5 to 6 months in most of the cases.28 cases were not successful and because presented either no change, or an increase or a temporary resolution and than reappearance of fluid.

The anatomical results in terms of resolution of the intra retinal fluid was overall encouraging. A success was judged present in 88 cases. The time for resolution is 5 to 6 months in most of the cases. 39 cases were not successful and  because presented either no change, or an increase or a temporary resolution and than reappearance of fluid.

The anatomical results in terms of resolution of the intra retinal fluid was overall encouraging. A success was judged present in 88 cases. The time for resolution is 5 to 6 months in most of the cases.39 cases were not successful and because presented either no change, or an increase or a temporary resolution and than reappearance of fluid.

The technique of creating an inverted flap of ILM to cover the pit was used in 8 cases. All of them were reported as successful in terms of resolution of fluid. However since the case series was too small there was no statistical significance.

The technique of creating an inverted flap of ILM to cover the pit was used in 8 cases. All of them were reported as successful in terms of resolution of fluid. However since the case series was too small there was no statistical significance.

A multivariate analysis was run to study the best predictors for anatomical success.

A multivariate analysis was run to study the best predictors for anatomical success.

A decision to regroup some variables was made. It was not possible to maintain all the variables in order to avoid to many subgroups.  The regrouping was done as follows.

A decision to regroup some variables was made. It was not possible to maintain all the variables in order to avoid to many subgroups.The regrouping was done as follows.

The probability of reabsorption of Subretinal fluid very strongly increases when using vitrectomy+laser+tamponade with respect to observation (odds=89.461, CI 7.816 -1023.98, p-value<0.001) and strongly when using vitrectomy + tamponade (odds=60.082, CI 4.252-848.986, p-value=0.002) and tamponade + laser (odds=57.955, CI 2.898 – 1159.144, p-value=0.007). Using laser only provides no advantage with respect to observation (odds=0.531, CI 0.045 – 6.314, p-value=0.616).

The probability of reabsorption of Subretinal fluid very strongly increases when using vitrectomy+laser+tamponade with respect to observation (odds=89.461, CI 7.816 -1023.98, p-value<0.001) and strongly when using vitrectomy + tamponade (odds=60.082, CI 4.252-848.986, p-value=0.002) and tamponade + laser (odds=57.955, CI 2.898 – 1159.144, p-value=0.007). Using laser only provides no advantage with respect to observation (odds=0.531, CI 0.045 – 6.314, p-value=0.616).

The graph shows the Log Odds of the probability of resolving the sub retinal fluid.  With “Log odds” the point of reference is zero. Above 0 is success. 0 means no difference. Below 0 is no success. The red bar shows the confidence interval therefore it means that there is no difference is terms of probability of success among vit+laser+tamp or vit+tamp or tamp+laser. Instead, observation and laser only are not successful.  However, it must be highlighted that in the observation group (obs), most of the cases did not have retinal detachment.

The graph shows the Log Odds of the probability of resolving the sub retinal fluid.With “Log odds” the point of reference is zero. Above 0 is success. 0 means no difference. Below 0 is no success.The red bar shows the confidence interval therefore it means that there is no difference is terms of probability of success among vit+laser+tamp or vit+tamp or tamp+laser. Instead, observation and laser only are not successful.However, it must be highlighted that in the observation group (obs), most of the cases did not have retinal detachment.

The probability of success decreases when intraretinal fluid is associated to sub retinal fluid.

The probability of success decreases when intraretinal fluid is associated to sub retinal fluid.

The probability of reabsorption of Intraretinal fluid is very strongly positively influenced by the technique implying vitrectomy.

The probability of reabsorption of Intraretinal fluid is very strongly positively influenced by the technique implying vitrectomy.

The graph shows the Log Odds of the probability of resolving the intra retinal fluid.  With “Log odds” the point of reference is zero. Above 0 is success. 0 means no difference. Below 0 is no success. The red bar shows the confidence interval therefore it means that there is no difference is terms of probability of success among vit+laser+tamp or vit+tamp or tamp+laser. Instead, observation and laser only are less or no successful, although the red bar is much wider than for sub retinal fluid.

The graph shows the Log Odds of the probability of resolving the intra retinal fluid.With “Log odds” the point of reference is zero. Above 0 is success. 0 means no difference. Below 0 is no success.The red bar shows the confidence interval therefore it means that there is no difference is terms of probability of success among vit+laser+tamp or vit+tamp or tamp+laser. Instead, observation and laser only are less or no successful, although the red bar is much wider than for sub retinal fluid.

content top