Additional surgical procedure, including vitrectomy and cataract surgery. · people with endophthalmitis following intraocular surgery
Vitrectomy showed no clear difference in additional surgical procedure, including vitrectomy and cataract… compared with vitreous tap biopsy and antibiotic injection (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Improvement in visual acuity at 3 months' · people with endophthalmitis following intraocular surgery
It is very uncertain whether vitrectomy changes proportion of people with a visual acuity improvement of 10 letters… compared with vitreous tap biopsy and antibiotic injection (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Visual acuity · people with endophthalmitis following intraocular surgery
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found
Quality of life. · people with endophthalmitis following intraocular surgery
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found
Any adverse effects · people with endophthalmitis following intraocular surgery
1 finding from 1 review
Visual acuity · participants with idiopathic macular hole
1 finding from 1 review
Closure of macular hole · participants with idiopathic macular hole
Vitrectomy leads to higher hole closure at 6‐12 months compared with observation (high certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Reading acuity · participants with idiopathic macular hole
1 finding from 1 review
Reading speed (words per minute) · participants with idiopathic macular hole
1 finding from 1 review
Hole recurrence · participants with idiopathic macular hole
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Adverse outcomes · participants with idiopathic macular hole
Vitrectomy led to lower adverse outcomes compared with observation; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Costs · participants with idiopathic macular hole
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Primary retinal reattachment at least 3 months after operation · people with simple rhegmatogenous retinal detachments
Pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) showed no clear difference in primary retinal reattachment at least 3 months after operation compared with scleral buckling (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Visual acuity · people with simple rhegmatogenous retinal detachments
1 finding from 1 review
Final anatomical success at least 3 months after operation · people with simple rhegmatogenous retinal detachments
Pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) showed no clear difference in final anatomical success at least 3 months after operation compared with scleral buckling (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Recurrence of retinal detachment at least 3 months after operation · people with simple rhegmatogenous retinal detachments
Pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) may leads to lower recurrence of retinal detachment at least 3 months after operation compared with scleral buckling (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Number of interventions needed to achieve final anatomical success at final · people with simple rhegmatogenous retinal detachments
1 finding from 1 review
Quality of life (satisfaction with vision) at least 3 months after operation · people with simple rhegmatogenous retinal detachments
It is very uncertain whether pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) changes quality of life (satisfaction with vision) at least 3 months after… compared with scleral buckling (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Adverse effects (cataract development, choroidal detachment, new/iatrogenic breaks, postoperative proliferative vitreoretinopathy, postoperative increase in intraocular pressure, development of cystoid macular oedema, macular pucker, strabismus) a... · people with simple rhegmatogenous retinal detachments
Pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) may leads to higher adverse effects (cataract development, choroidal detachment,… compared with scleral buckling (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review