2019 - 4 Issue

Original article

Treatment of Vitreomacular Traction with Intravitreal Injection of Perfluoropropane

Miroslav Veith ORCID
Martin Penčák ORCID – Jan Ernest ORCID – Zbyněk Straňák ORCID

Full Text links

DOI: 10.31348/2019/4/2

Published in Czech and Slovak Ophtalmology: 2019 - 4

Published on website: 06.01.2020

Keywords: posterior vitreous membrane, vitreomacular traction, intravitreal injection, perfluoropropane, C3F8

Summary

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of one intravitreal injection of expansive gas in the treatment of vitreomacular traction (VMT).

Method: Retrospective evaluation of results of treatment of VMT with the aid of a single intraocular application of 0.3 ml 100% C3F8 gas. The procedure was performed in outpatient treatment under topical anaesthesia.

Results: Twelve patients (14 eyes) underwent pneumatic vitreolysis. The mean extent of vitreomacular adhesion was 490.5 µm (408-751). Detachment of the posterior vitreous membrane occurred in 13 eyes (92.9%) after one injection, in 11 of these eyes this took place during the first month of observation (84.6%), in the other two eyes within two months of the procedure. Visual acuity improved from a baseline mean value of 0.50 (0.16-0.18) to 0.67 (0.2-1.0) (p < 0.001). The procedure was also successful in two eyes in which a previous attempt to release VMT with the aid of ocriplasmin had been unsuccessful. In one eye macular hole developed. We did not record any other complications in this cohort.

Conclusion: Intravitreal application of C3F8 represents an effective, safe and inexpensive method of treatment of VMT.

References

  1. Buzzacco DM., Patel SS.: Treatment of Symptomatic Vitreomacular Adhesion with Expansile Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) Gas. Open Ophthalmol J, 11; 2017: 80-83.
  2. Cigánek P., Matoušková L., Kousal B.: Dynamic vitreomacular traction. Cesk Slov Oftalmol, 71; 2015: 23-28
  3. Čokl N., Globočnik Petrovič M.: Intravitreal Injection of Per - fluoropropane is More Efficacious than Sulfur Hexafluoride In Releasing Vitreomacular Traction. Acta Clin Croat, 57; 2018: 327-334.
  4. Day S., Martinez JA., Nixon PA., et al.: Intravitreal sulfir hexafluoride injection for the treatment of vitreomacular traction syndrome. Retina, 36; 2016: 733-737.
  5. Dugel PU., Tolentino M., Feiner L., et al.: Results of the 2-Year Ocriplasmin for Treatment for Symptomatic Vitreomacular Adhesion Including Macular Hole (OASIS) Randomized Trial. Ophthalmology, 123; 2016: 2232-2247.
  6. Gandorfer A.: Enzymatic vitreous disruption. Eye (Lond), 22; 2008: 1273-1277.
  7. Hikichi T., Yoshida A., Trempe CL.: Course of vitreomacular traction syndrome. Am J Ophthalmol, 119; 1995: 55-61.
  8. Chan CK., Crosson JN., Mein CE., et al.: Pneumatic vitreolysis for relief of vitreomacular traction. Retina, 37; 2017: 1820-1831.
  9. Chan CK., Wessels IF., Friedrichsen EJ.: Treatment of idi - opathic macular holes by induced posterior vitreous detachment. Ophthalmology, 102; 1995: 757-767.
  10. Johnson MW.: How should we release vitreomacular traction: surgically, pharmacologically, or pneumatically? Am J Ophthalmol, 155; 2013: 203-205.
  11. Jackson TL., Donachie PH., Johnston RL.: Electronic medical record database study of vitrectomy and observation for vitreomacular traction. Retina, 36; 2016: 1897-905.
  12. Jackson TL., Donachie PHJ., Sparrow JM., et al.: United Kingdom National Ophthalmology Database Study of Vitreoretinal Surgery: report 2, macular hole. Ophthalmology, 120; 2013: 629-634.
  13. Jackson TL., Donachie PH., Sparrow JM., et al.: United Kingdom National Ophthalmology Database Study of Vitreoretinal Surgery: report 1; casemix, complication, and cataract. Eye (Lond), 27; 2013: 644-651.
  14. Jackson TL., Nicod E., Angelis A., et al.: Pars plana vitrectomy for vitreomacular traction syndrome: a systematic review and metaanalysis of safety and efficacy. Retina, 33; 2013: 2012-2017.
  15. Kang SW., et al.: Induction of vitreolysis and vitreous detachment with hyaluronidase and perfluoropropane gas. Korean J Ophthalmol, 9; 1995: 69-78.
  16. Odrobina D., Michalewska Z., Michalewski J., et al.: Long-term evaluation of vitreomacular traction disorder in re are few published cohorts, and the effectiveness appears to be rather lower in comparison with C3F8, which could be in connection with the shorter duration of its effect. Day et al. recorded release of VMT after the application of SF6 in 55.6% of eyes (4). Čokl et al. compared the effect of both gasses in a prospective study (3). With the aid of C3F8 they achieved release of VMT in 62% of eyes, whereas after application of SF6 traction was released in only 21.4% of eyes. C3F8 was more effective in eyes with an extent of vitreomacular adhesion of > 500 µm (p = 0.001), in the case of adhesions of lesser extent the effect of both gases was comparable. Experiences with the use of SF6 were published also by Buzzacco. Release of VMT was achieved in 83% of eyes. However, the cohort numbered only 6 eyes (1). Pneumatic vitreolysis can be performed also on eyes in which previous tre
  17. Rodríguez A., Infante R., Rodríguez FJ., et al.: Spontaneous separation in idiopathic vitreomacular traction syndrome associated with contralateral full-thickness macular hole. Eur J Ophthalmol, 16; 2006: 733-740.
  18. Rodrigues IA., Stangos AN., McHugh DA., et al.: Intravitreal injection of expansile perfluoropropane (C3F8) for the treatment of vitreomacular traction. Am J Ophthalmol, 155; 2013: 270-276.
  19. Sebag J.: Anomalous posterior vitreous detachment: a unifying concept in vitreo-retinal disease. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 242; 2004: 690-698.
  20. Stalmans P., Benz MS., Gandorfer A., et al.: Enzymatic vitreolysis with ocriplasmin for vitreomacular traction and macular holes. N Engl J Med, 367; 2012: 606-615.
  21. Steinle NC., Dhoot DS., Quezada Ruiz C., et al.: Treament of vitreomacular traction with intravitreal perfluoropropane (C3F8) injection. Retina, 37; 2017: 643-650.
  22. Tornambe PE.: Pneumatic retinopexi: the evolution of case selection and surgical technique. A twelve-year study of 302 eyes. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc, 95; 1997: 551-