Skip to main content
. 2015 Aug 7;2015(8):CD008214. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008214.pub3

Ahn 2011.

Methods Prospective, randomised, open‐label trial
Country: South Korea
Participants Number: 107
Age: Mean age (± SD). Preoperative IVB group 51.0 (± 9.5), intraoperative IVB group 55.6 (± 10.6), and control 55.0 (± 11.4)
Sex: (Male/female). Preoperative IVB group 23/13, intraoperative IVB group 21/16, and control 16/18
Inclusion criteria:

  1. Non‐clearing vitreous haemorrhage

  2. Macula‐involving or macula‐threatening TRD or fibrovascular proliferation with vitreoretinal adhesions


Exclusion criteria:

  1. Intraoperative use of long‐acting gas or silicone oil

  2. Repeat vitrectomy after first vitrectomy for retinal diseases other than vitreous haemorrhage

  3. Previous history of vitrectomy

  4. Uncontrolled hypertension

  5. History of blood coagulopathy
Interventions Intervention:

  • IVB injection (1.25 mg/0.05 ml) 1 to 14 days before PPV

  • IVB injection (1.25 mg/0.05 ml) at the end of PPV


Comparator:

  • No IVB injection
Outcomes Primary outcome measures:

  • Incidence of early (< 4 weeks) POVCH

  • Incidence of late (> 4 weeks) POVCH


Secondary outcome measures:

  • Initial time of vitreous clearing

  • BCVA at 6 months after surgery


Follow‐up: 1 day, 1 week, 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery if there were no postoperative events
Notes A total of 107 eyes of 91 participants, of which there were 16 bilateral participants, were included for analysis.
Trial registration number: NTC00745498
Date study conducted: June 2008 to October 2010 (from trials registry entry)
Funding: not reported
Conflict of interest: reported that there were none
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Randomisation was carried out using a permuted block analysis
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Allocation was performed by a biostatistician
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes High risk The study was open label
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes High risk The study was open label
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk The distribution and attrition rate of study participants was clearly described in a flow chart
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk All outcomes were reported