Correspondence

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid

Excerpt

To the Editor:
We read with interest the article titled “Risk of multiple recurring retinal detachment after primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment repair” by Philip Enders et al.1 It gives us a much needed insight on the outcomes of recurrent retinal detachments.
The article also gives important information that 73 percent of recurrent retinal detachment did not need more than 1 reintervention. However, we believe that a few more issues need to be addressed. We believe that the heterogeneity of the data set in terms of extent of detachment and location of breaks brings bias into the interpretation of results. Previously known risk factors for recurrence like low intraocular pressure, inferior breaks, extent of detachment, and number of breaks have not been commented on.
It was very prudent to have analyzed the factors associated with one and multiple recurrences as separate events. The presence of proliferative vitreoretinopathy during the primary surgery was noted to be one of the most significant factors associated with multiple recurrence. However, additional data on number of surgeries which used an encirclage during the primary surgery due to the presence of proliferative vitreoretinopathy would have provided an insight into the role of encirclage under such situations for minimizing recurrences.
The use of Densiron as an endotamponade was shown to be significantly associated with recurrence. However, this brings a bias because of the limited number of cases and the type of primary detachment in which it was used.
Therefore, although this article does add to the limited literature on recurrent retinal detachments and can prove useful in prognosticating such cases, we believe that it could have been more useful if the above-mentioned issues had been addressed.
    loading  Loading Related Articles