2MD, Professor, University of Health Sciences, Ankara Etlik City Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye DOI : 10.37845/ret.vit.2023.32.32 Purpose: It was aimed to determine whether there is a difference between the anatomical and visual surgical results of patients underwent surgery for a macular hole who were immediately placed in the prone position in the operating room at the end of the surgery, or placed in the delayed prone position after transfer to the inpatient service.
Materials and Methods: This retrospective observational study included 85 patients who had surgery for macular hole using 25 Gauge vitrectomy system. At the end of surgery, 12% C3F8 or 15% SF6 gas tamponade were used. We compared 42 patients (Group 1) who were placed in the prone position immediately and 43 patients who were placed in the prone position after an average of 15 minutes (12-18 minutes) (Group 2). The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at preoperative and postoperative 3 months were compared and anatomical success rates were determined. Descriptive analyses, Chi-square, Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were used.
Results: Anatomical success rate was 95.2% in Group 1 and 93.1% in Group 2. There was no significant difference in anatomical success and BCVA results between the patients who immediately placed in the prone position in the operating room and the patients who were placed in the delayed prone position (p>0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between type of tamponade material used and the BCVA on postoperative month 3 (p>0.05).
Conclusion: This suggests that the rigidity in the prone position is not absolute and the cumulative effect in the early postoperative period is important.
Keywords : Gas tamponade, Macular hole, Prone position, Visual acuity