TABLE 3.
The summaries of studies about sealants based on polysaccharides as retinal patches for the treatment of RRD.
| Sealants | Authors | Date | Preclinical studies | Clinical trails |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Seprafilm | Jun et al. (Sueda et al., 2006) | 2006 | In vitro study about physicochemical properties. | — |
| In vivo study about biocompatibility. | ||||
| Teruya et al. (Teruya et al., 2009) | 2009 | In vivo study about biocompatibility and efficacy in RRD model of rabbit eyes. | — | |
| Haruta et al. (Haruta et al., 2017) | 2017 | — | Seprafilm replaced the long-lasting vitreous substitutes, achieving 100% (4 cases) retinal reattachment and confirming long-term safety (9 years follow-up). | |
| Healflow | Barth et al. (Barth et al., 2014) | 2014 | In vitro study about biocompatibility. | — |
| Barth et al. (Barth et al., 2016) | 2016 | In vivo study about biocompatibility. | — | |
| Barth et al. (Barth et al., 2019) | 2019 | In vivo study about biocompatibility. | — | |
| Ren et al. (Ren et al., 2020) | 2020 | In vitro study about adhesion and duration in BSS. | Healaflow replaced the long-lasting vitreous substitutes, and achieved 97.4% retinal reattachment (37 eyes) at first, after the second surgery in one eye due to failure of the chorioretinal scar around retinal breaks, 100% reattachment rate was achieved. | |
| Dispersive OVD | Hirata et al. (Hirata et al., 2013) | 2013 | In vivo study about biocompatibility and efficacy in RRD model of rabbit eyes. | None |