The Analysis of Risk Factors of Development of Macular Edema after Phacoemulsification
https://doi.org/10.18008/1816-5095-2019-2-185-191
Abstract
Purpose: To identify and analyze factors contributing to the development of macular edema after cataract phacoemulsification (FEC).
Methods: over 3 years of follow-up, 6218 surgeries were performed in 4608 patients. They were divided into three groups, taking into account the specifics of the surgery: operated on with 2.2 mm access without posterior capsulorhexis (РC), operated on using MICS technology through access 1.6–1.8 mm without РC, patients operated on with MICS technology through access of 1.6–1.8 mm from РC. The study included patients with persistent cystic macular edema (СMЕ), whose treatment required invasive interventions. During the observation period, 28 cases of persistent CME were identified, which were divided into groups corresponding to the time of onset, type of surgery and comorbidities.
Results: a comparative analysis in groups without posterior capsulorhexis with access of 2.2 mm (n = 513) and 1.6–1.8 mm (n = 2588) using the Student’s statistical confidence coefficient (P) showed that a decrease in surgical access was significantly reduces the risk of СМЕ, which confirms its connection with the invasiveness of the intervention.
Conclusion: Identified groups of factors that influence the nature of the macula response to the FEC, in particular, the occurrence of macular edema. All factors were analyzed. It was revealed that such factors as comorbidities (diabetes mellitus, age-related macular degeneration), type of surgical approach, and the presence of the epiretinal membrane directly affected the development and progression of macular edema. All factors were analyzed. It was revealed that such factors as comorbidities (diabetes mellitus, age related macular degeneration), type of surgical approach, and the presence of the epiretinal membrane directly affected the development and progression of macular edema. At the same time, revealed a direct relationship between the time of occurrence of CME and its effectiveness, as well as the volume of its invasive treatment. A significant increase in visual acuity in patients suggests a high efficacy of CME treatment associated with surgery.
About the Author
V. L. Kokorev
Voronezh state medical university named N.N. Burdenko;
Medical center “Modern ophthalmology”
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Department of ophthalmology, Student str., 10, Voronezh, 394036;
assistant, leading ophthalmologist, K. Marx str., 116a -22,Voronezh, 394030
References
1. Eliseeva E.G., Malakhova A.A., Graznova N.N. Postoperative Irvine-Gasss yndrome maculopathy. Annals of Ophthalmology = Vestnik oftal’mologii 1983;1:35–38 (In Russ.).
2. Grzybowski A., Sikorski B., Ascaso F., Huerva V. Pseudophakic cystoid macular edema: update 2016. ClinIntervAging. 2016;11:1221–1229. DOI: 10.2147/CIA.S111761
3. Irvine S.R. A newly defined vitreous syndrome following cataract surgery. Am J Ophthalmol. 1953;36(5):599–619.
4. Sahin M., Cingu A.K., Gozum N. Evaluation of Cystoid Macular Edema Using Optical Coherence Tomography and Fundus Autofluorescence after Uncomplicated Phacoemulsification Surgery. J Ophthalmol. 2013;2013:1–5. DOI: 10.1155/2013/376013
5. Rodin A.S. New clinical possibilities of optical coherence tomography. Earlydiagnosis of macular pathology in patients with high visual acuity. Ophthalmology. 2004;1(4):24–28 (In Russ.).
6. Khudyakov A.Yu., Sorokin E.L., Rudenko V.A. The peculiaritis of vitreomacular interface and its role in pathogenesis of macular edema after phacoemulsification. Far East Medical Journal = Dal’nevostochnyj medicinski zhurnal. 2011;3:72–75 (In Russ.).
7. Parente I., Ozturker C., Utine C. A, Cakir M. Evaluation of macular changes after uncomplicated phacoemulsification surgery byoptical tomography. CurrEyeRes. 2007;32(3):241–243. DOI: 10.1080/02713680601160610 8. Tsilimbaris M.K., Tsika C., Diakonis V., Karavitaki A., Pallikaris I. Macular Edema and Cataract Surgery. Cataract Surgery. 2013;22:323–336. DOI: 10.5772/765
8. Egorov V.V., Egorova A.V., Smolyakova G.P. Clinical and prognostic evaluation of risk factors for macular edema in diabetic patients after phacoemulsification. Ophthalmology. 2008;1:51–58 (In Russ.).
9. Astakhov S.Yu., Gobedzhishvili M.V. Postoperative macular edema, Irvine-Gasssyndrome. Clinical ophthalmology = Klinicheskaya oftal’mologiya. 2010;11(1):5–8 (in Russ.).
10. Gobejishvili M.V., Astakhov S.Yu., Kugleev А.А. Macular edema in patients with pseudophakia. Ophthalmology journal = Oftal’mologicheskie vedomosti. 2011;4(4):57–59 (In Russ.).
11. Draganic V., Vukosavljevic M., Petrovic N., Milivojevic M., Resan M. Evolution of cataract surgery: smaller incision — lesscomplications. Vojnosanit Pregl. 2012;69(5):385–388.
12. Yang J., Cai L., Sun Z., Ye H., Fan Q., Zhang K., Lu W., Lu Y. Risk factors for and diagnosis of pseudophakiccystoid macular edema after cataract surgery in diabetic patients. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2017;43(2):207–214. DOI: 10.1016/j. jcrs.2016.11.047
13. Rudenko V.A., Sorokin E.L. The study of the morphometric features of the patients eyes witht raction macular edema after phacoemulsification for agerelated cataracts. Kuban scientific medical bulletin = Kubanskiy nauchnyy meditsinskiy vestnik. 2013;2:21–25 (in Russ.).
14. Fedorov S.N., Egiriva E.V. Mistakes and complications during implantation of an artificial lens. Мedicine = Meditsina. 1992;244–245 (in Russ.).
15. Lobo C.L., Faria P.M., Soares M.A., Bernardes R.C., Cunda-Vaz J.G. Macular alterations after small — incision cataract surgery. J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 2004;30:752– 760. DOI: 10.1016/S0886-3350(03)00582-0
16. Biro Z., Balla Z., Kovach B. Change of foveal and perifoveal thickness measured by OCT after phacoemulsification and IOL implant. Eye. 2006; 22:8–12. DOI: 10.1038/sj.eye.6702460
17. Henderson B., Kim J., Ament C., Ferrufino-Ponce Z., Grabowska A., Cremers S. Clinical pseudophakic cystoid macular edema Risk factors for development and duration after treatment. J. Cataract. RefractSurg. 2007;33:1550–1558. DOI: 10.1016/j. jcrs.2007.05.013
18. Biro Z, Balla Z, Kovacs B. Change of foveal and peri foveal thickness measured by OCT after phacoemulsification and IOL implantation. Eye 2008; 22:8–12. DOI: 10.1038/sj.eye.6702460
19. Wielders L.H.P., Schouten J.S.A.G., Nuijts R.M.M.A. Prevention of macular edema after cataract surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2018;29(1):48–53. DOI: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000436
20. De Silva S.R., Riaz Y., Evans J.R. Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intra ocular lens versus extra capsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intra ocular lens for age-related cataract. Cochrane Database SystRev. 2014;1:53. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008812.pub2
21. Balashevich L.I., Takhtaev Yu.V., Radchenko A.T. Posterior capsulorhexis during phacoemulsification at the back of the transparentlens capsule. Ophthalmоsurgery = Oftal’mokhirurgiya 2008;1:36–41 (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Kokorev V.L. The Analysis of Risk Factors of Development of Macular Edema after Phacoemulsification. Ophthalmology in Russia. 2019;16(2):185-191. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18008/1816-5095-2019-2-185-191
Views:
1263
Email this article 