Primary Retinal Detachment
Primary Retinal Detachment
Primary Retinal Detachment
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
28<br />
2 Prophylaxis in Fellow Eye of <strong>Primary</strong> <strong>Retinal</strong> <strong>Detachment</strong><br />
Table 2.2. Remaining risk of retinal detachment (RD) following “prophylactic”<br />
treatment of fellow eyes with predisposing lesions<br />
Author(s) Risk of RD (%)<br />
Michaelson et al. 1972 [16] 9.1<br />
Morax et al. 1974 [17] 8.6<br />
Dralands et al. 1980 [18] 2.9<br />
Meyer-Schwickerath and Fried 1980 [3] 5.0<br />
Girard et al. 1982, 1983 [19, 20] 4.4<br />
Haut et al. 1988 [4] 2.0–5.5<br />
Folk et al. 1989 [21] 2.9<br />
Table 2.3. Incidence of retinal detachment in fellow eyes of comparison<br />
groups of patients with “dangerous” lesions without and with “prophylactic”<br />
treatment<br />
Author(s) Without Rx (%) With Rx (%)<br />
Dralands et al. 1980 [18] 3.7 2.9<br />
Girard et al. 1982, 1983 [19, 20] 0.0 4.4<br />
Folk et al. 1989 [21] 5.1 2.9<br />
with lattice degeneration, 79% of the tears were located in such<br />
areas [15].<br />
As for the third assumption, various reports have shown the<br />
still remaining rate of detachment following “prophylactic” treatment<br />
of fellow eyes to be from 2% to 9% [3, 4, 16–21] (Table 2.2).<br />
It is especially helpful in this discussion to present data reported<br />
by authors who compared two parallel groups of patients – one<br />
being treated and one not being treated [18–21]. These are summarized<br />
in Table 2.3.<br />
This led Michaelson et al. [16] to say that “no notable drop in<br />
fellow eye detachment had occurred”, and they officially discontinued<br />
the practice of “prophylactic” treatment. Dralands et al. [18]