The necessity and optimal time for performing pars plana vitrectomy in acute retinal necrosis patients

BACKGROUND To compare the efficacy of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) at different time points to treat acute retinal necrosis (ARN) and to investigate the necessity of PPV for ARN. METHODS A retrospective review of the treatment options and outcomes of the ARN patients was performed. Thirty ARN patients (34 eyes) were included in this study. The eyes were divided into 3 groups depending on the treatment administered. In the medically treated group, there was no retinal detachment (RD) at the first visit. The routine group patients were treated with systemic antiviral medications, as well as with intravitreal antiviral injections. In the early PPV treatment group, there was no RD at the first visit. The early PPV treatment group patients were treated with systemic antiviral medications and PPV plus silicone oil tamponade and intravitreal injection. In the PPV group, there was RD at the first visit. The PPV group patients were treated with systemic antiviral medications and PPV plus silicone oil tamponade and intravitreal injection. RESULTS In the medically treated group, the mean baseline best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) (logMAR) was 1.38 ± 0.35. The BCVA was 1.21 ± 0.36 at the last visit for the medically treated group. In this group, one eye (12.5%) developed RD after 1 month of treatment. In the early PPV treatment group, the mean BCVA (logMAR) was 1.68 ± 0.26. The BCVA was 1.83 ± 0.21 at the last visit for the early PPV group. In this group, five eyes (29.4%) had recurrent RD before silicone oil removal. In the PPV group, the mean BCVA (logMAR) was 2.0 ± 0.35. The BCVA was 1.72 ± 0.34 at the last visit for the PPV group. In this group, one eye (11.1%) had recurrent RD before silicone oil removal. There were no significant differences among the three groups in the baseline BCVA and the BCVA at the last visit (p>0.05). There were no significant differences between the early PPV group and the PPV group in the recurrent RD rates (p = 0.38). CONCLUSIONS Prophylactic PPV showed no difference in recurrent RD rates or better BCVA. Therefore, prophylactic vitrectomy cannot prevent RD nor improve the prognosis of ARN based on our research.