Classifications for Proliferative Vitreoretinopathy (PVR): An Analysis of Their Use in Publications over the Last 15 Years. (27th June 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Di Lauro, Salvatore; Kadhim, Mustafa R.; Charteris, David G.; Pastor, J. Carlos
• Other Names: Teoh Stephen Charn Beng Academic Editor.
• Is Part Of: Journal of ophthalmology. Volume 2016(2016)
• Publication Date: 2016-06-27
• Subjects: Ophthalmology -- Periodicals; Eye Diseases; Ophthalmology; Ophthalmology; Electronic journals; Periodicals; Periodicals; Fulltext; Internet Resources; Periodicals; 617.7
• DOI: 10.1155/2016/7807596
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2090-004X

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose . To evaluate the current and suitable use of current proliferative vitreoretinopathy (PVR) classifications in clinical publications related to treatment. Methods . A PubMed search was undertaken using the term "proliferative vitreoretinopathy therapy". Outcome parameters were the reported PVR classification and PVR grades. The way the classifications were used in comparison to the original description was analyzed. Classification errors were also included. It was also noted whether classifications were used for comparison before and after pharmacological or surgical treatment. Results . 138 papers were included. 35 of them (25.4%) presented no classification reference or did not use any one. 103 publications (74.6%) used a standardized classification. The updated Retina Society Classification, the first Retina Society Classification, and the Silicone Study Classification were cited in 56.3%, 33.9%, and 3.8% papers, respectively. Furthermore, 3 authors (2.9%) used modified-customized classifications and 4 (3.8%) classification errors were identified. When the updated Retina Society Classification was used, only 10.4% of authors used a full C grade description. Finally, only 2 authors reported PVR grade before and after treatment. Conclusions . Our findings suggest that current classifications are of limited value in clinical practice due to the inconsistent and limited use and that it may be of benefit to produce a revised classification.