June 2017
Volume 58, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2017
27-gauge vs 25-gauge vitrectomy for different retinal pathologies
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Ermete Giancipoli
    Ophthalmology, Sassari University Hospital, Bari, Bari, Italy
  • Giuseppe D'Amico Ricci
    Ophthalmology, Sassari University Hospital, Bari, Bari, Italy
  • Francesco Boscia
    Ophthalmology, Sassari University Hospital, Bari, Bari, Italy
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Ermete Giancipoli, Allergan (R); Giuseppe D'Amico Ricci, None; Francesco Boscia, Alcon (C), Allergan (C), Bayer (C), Novartis (C)
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2017, Vol.58, 5005. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Ermete Giancipoli, Giuseppe D'Amico Ricci, Francesco Boscia; 27-gauge vs 25-gauge vitrectomy for different retinal pathologies. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2017;58(8):5005.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Purpose : Microincision vitrectomy surgery has obvious advantages over 20 gauge (20-G) vitrectomy. Some debate still exists if changing from 25-G to 27-G probes may add extra benefits to the procedure rather than burdens.
In this retrospective study we compared 27-G with 25-G pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for different retinal pathologies, in terms of surgery duration, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraoperative and postoperative complications

Methods : Twenty eyes of 20 patients (6 male, 14 female; mean age: 48 years old), who underwent 27G (10 eyes) or 25G (10 eyes) PPV for different retinal pathologies, were evaluated. The mean duration for total vitrectomy and for different surgical steps was calculated through a review of surgical videos. BCVA and intraocular pressure (IOP) at 1, 7 and 30 days after surgery were also recorded. Post surgical inflammation was assessed at 1, 7 and 30 days after surgery using an anterior segment inflammation score (range from 0 = no inflammation to 2,5 = severe inflammation).

Results : The distribution of retinal pathologies was similar between the two groups: retinal detachment (27G: 2 eyes; 25G: 3 eyes), vitreous haemorrhage (27 G: 3 eyes; 25 G: 2 eyes), epiretinal membranes/macular holes (27 G: 5 eyes; 25 G: 5 eyes).
No statistically significant difference was found between 27G and 25G group in terms of mean duration (minutes) of total vitrectomy (10.86 ± 9.5 vs 10.39 ± 6.9; P=0.86), core vitrectomy (6.80 ± 6.54 vs 5.94 ± 2.1; P=0.53), shave vitrectomy (9.1 ± 5.1 vs 9 ± 5; P > 0.99), membrane peeling (7.7 ± 3.5 vs 4.3 ± 0.83; P=0.05) and fluid-air exchange (4.9 ± 5.8 vs 2.8 ± 2.7; P=0.21).
No intraoperative complications were reported.
Post surgical inflammation score didn’t show significant differences between the 27G and 25G group 1 day after surgery (0.4 ± 0.4 vs 0.37 ± 0.48 respectively; P=0.77).
Mean IOP was higher in 25G group than in 27G group at 1 day after vitrectomy (P = 0.1), but no longer at 7 (P = 0.2) and 30 days (P = 0,8).
BCVA improved in both groups at 1 month, but only in 25G group the improvement was significant (P = 0.03)

Conclusions : Efficacy and safety of 27G system is comparable to 25G system. We didn’t find significant differences in terms of surgery duration, intraoperative and postoperative complications.The difference in final BCVA could be explained by the variability among patients selected.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2017 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Baltimore, MD, May 7-11, 2017.


This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.