Facultad de Medicina y Ciencias de la Salud Universidad Abierta Interamericana
Hospital Alemán, Buenos Aires - Argentina
Background: A significant percentage of patients who have undergone rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) surgery have experienced retinal displacement as a complication, regardless of the surgery's success, meaning its recurrence. The main symptom is metamorphopsia or aniseikonia. Material and methods: Medical articles related to this complication have been used and collected from 2010 to the present, utilizing scientific search engines such as Google Scholar, PubMed, and other ophthalmology websites (such as the British Ophthalmology Academy and JAMA Ophthalmology).Results: : As a result of the different articles, a total of 1,258 eyes were analyzed, and retinal displacement was found in various surgical contexts: Pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with gas: Retinal displacement was observed in 62.8% of cases.PPV versus pneumatic retinopexy (NR): Retinal displacement was found in 44.4% of cases with PPV and 7.0% with NR.Gas tamponade versus silicone oil tamponade: Retinal displacement was present in 44% of patients with gas tamponade and 22% with silicone oil tamponade.PPV versus scleral buckle: Retinal displacement occurred in 58.8% of eyes with PPV and 0% with a scleral buckle.Conclusion: The displacement of the retina generates visual symptoms that often impact the final outcome of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) surgery, despite surgical success. This recently described condition poses a new challenge for retina surgeons when determining the surgical strategy to be applied. There is variability in outcomes depending on the technique used, and it also appears to be related to the type of tamponade and the amount of subretinal fluid at the time of its use
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.