Hsu, Jason

Purpose: To evaluate anatomic outcomes and surgeon response following the use of microserrated (Sharkskin, Alcon, Forth Worth, TX) internal limiting membrane (ILM) forceps compared with conventional (Grieshaber; Alcon) ILM forceps for peeling of the ILM. Methods: Patients were prospectively assigned in a 1:1 randomized fashion to undergo ILM peeling using microserrated forceps or conventional forceps. Rates of retinal hemorrhages, deep retinal grasps, ILM regrasping, time to ILM removal, and surgeon questionnaire comparing the use of microserrated and conventional ILM forceps were analyzed. Results: A total of 90 eyes of 90 patients were included in this study. The mean number of deep retinal grasps was higher in the conventional forceps group (1.51 ± 1.70 vs. 0.33 ± 0.56, respectively [P < 0.0001]). The mean number of failed ILM grasps was higher with conventional forceps (6.62 ± 3.51 vs. 5.18 ± 2.06 [P = 0.019]). Microserrated forceps provided more comfortability (lower number) in initiating the ILM flap (2.16 ± 0.85 vs. 1.56 ± 0.76, P < 0.001), comfortability in regrasping the ILM flap (2.51 ± 1.01 vs. 1.98 ± 0.89, P = 0.01), and comfortability in completing the ILM flap (2.42 ± 1.03 vs. 1.84 ± 1.02, P = 0.01). Conclusion: Surgeons utilizing the microserrated forceps experienced fewer deep retina grasps and fewer failed ILM grasps compared with conventional ILM forceps. The microserrated forceps was also a more favorable experience subjectively among the surgeons.

Purpose: To evaluate the impact of anti–vascular endothelial growth factor therapy on the refractive error in eyes with diabetic macular edema. Methods: Post hoc analysis of Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research protocol T. Spherical equivalent (SE) was calculated for study and fellow eyes at baseline, 1-year, and 2-year visits. The SE change of the eyes with edema was compared with those with resolved edema. The correlation between refractive error changes and central subfield thickness was evaluated. Results: Among 543 study eyes, SE changed from −0.17 (2.04) D at baseline visit to −0.16 (2.14) D at 2 years giving a hyperopic shift of 0.04 (0.82) D (P = 0.022). Among fellow eyes, mean (SD) SE changed from −0.19 (2.1) D at baseline to −0.11 (2.1) D at 2 years, giving a hyperopic shift of 0.12 (0.84) D (P = 0.001). No significant difference in SE shift was found between eyes with and without edema at 2 years in phakic (0.12D and 0.08 D, P = 0.87) and pseudophakic eyes (−0.24D and −0.08D, P = 0.30). The SE shift was not correlated with central subfield thickness change at the end of the second year (r = 0.02, P = 0.62). Conclusion: Diabetic macular edema patients have minimal changes in refractive error. The correction of refractive error may be considered during treatment, regardless of the presence of edema.