Authors
Kislitsyna N.M. 1, Novikov S.V.2, Buldakov I.A.1
1 S.N. Fedorov NMRC «MNTK «Eye Microsurgery», Moscow
2 OOO «NEP MG», Moscow
Abstract
To date, the traditional list of methods for preoperative diagnosis of changes in the vitreous body and vitreoretinal interface includes ultrasound methods, OCT, confocal laser scanning ophthalmoscopy, and chromovitrectomy. Each of them has its own advantages, but due to limited resolution, they cannot provide the completeness of the clinical picture of intravital visualization of the vitreous body and vitreoretinal interface.
Target. To conduct a comparative analysis of the methods of intravital visualization of the vitreous body and the vitreoretinal interface.
Materials and methods. The study was conducted in 254 patients with pathology of the retina and vitreous using an intraoperative diagnostic method - vitreocontrastography using the substance “Vitreocontrast”. The effectiveness of this method was analyzed in comparison with other standard imaging methods according to special proven methodological principles.
Results. The diagnostic efficiency of the vitreocontrastography method is 93% of the required level of vitreous imaging efficiency, which significantly exceeds the performance of ultrasound, OCT, confocal laser scanning ophthalmoscopy, and chromovitrectomy methods.
Conclusion. Vitreocontrastography is a new vector of intraoperative visualization of the pathomorphology of the vitreous body structures and vitreoretinal interface, which provides ample opportunities for step-by-step determination of the features of the vitreous body structures and has significant advantages over other instrumental imaging methods.
Keywords: vitreocontrast, cortical layers, vitreous body, vitreoretinal interface.
References
1. Peyman G.A., Cheema R., Conway M.D. Triamcinolone acetonide as an aid to visualization of the vitreous and the posterior hyaloid during pars plana vitrectomy. Retina. 2000;20(5):554–5.
2. E.V. Boyko, A.A. Anisimov, S.V. Churashov, et al. Modern possibilities of visualization of vitreoretinal structures: problems and prospects. Pacific Medical Journal — 2016 No. 3. — pp. 5-11. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17238/PmJ1609-1175.2016.3.5–11.
3. Pulse-encoded ultrasound imaging of the vitreous with an annular array/ R.H. Silverman. Ophtalmic. Surg. Lasers Imaging. — 2012. — Vol.43 №1. — pp. 82-86.
4. Rahman R., Verification of posterior hyaloid starus during pars plana vitrectomy, after preoperative evalution on optical coherence tomography / R. Rahman, R. Chaudhary, N. Anand. Retina. — 2012. — Vol.32, №4. — pp. 706-710.
5. Restori M. Imaging the vitreous: optical coherence tomography and ultrasound imaging. Eye. — 2008. — Vol.22 №10. — pp. 1251-1256.
6. Taneja N. Optical coherence tomography in patients with decreased visual acuity after successful surgery for proliferative vitreoretinopathy. Arch. Ophtalmol. — 2007. — Vol.125, №6 — p.855.
7. Sebag J. To see the invisible: the quest of imaging vitreous. Dev.Ophtalmol. -2008. — Vol.42. — pp. 5-28
8. Vitreoschisis in macular diseases /P. Gupta [et al.]. Br. J. Ophtalmol.- 2011. — Vol 95, №3 . — pp. 376-380
9. Kislitsyna N.M., Novikov S.V., Perova N.V, et al. Experimental in vitro Comparative Study of Chromovitectomy Agents Cyto- and Phototoxicity. Ophthalmology. 2020;17(3):473–480. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.18008/1816-5095-2020-3-473-480.
10. Kislitsyna N.M., Novikov S.V., Belikova S.V. Application of a new contrast agent for visualization of vitreous body structures (experimental study) // Ophthalmosurgery. — 2010. — No. 1. — S. 54-57. (In Russ.)
11. Belikova, S.V.; Kislitsyna, N.M.; Novikov, S.V. Using of a new dye “vitreocontrast” for the vitreous body visualization// Joint Congress of SOE/AAO. — Geneva, 2011. — P. 174
12. N.M. Kislitsyna, S.V. Novikov, A.V. Shatskikh, et. al. Study of the structures of the vitreous body using the suspension “Vitreocontrast”. Ophthalmosurgery. — 2013. — No. 4. — P.66-71. (In Russ.)
13. Kislitsyna N.M., Kolesnik S.V., Novikov S.V., et. al. Modern Possibilities for the Vireoretinal Interface Contrasting (Experimental Study). Ophthalmology in Russia. 2018;15(2S):231–238. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.18008/1816-5095-2018-2S-231-238
14. Kislitsyna N.M., Novikov S.V., Kolesnik S.V., et. al. Anatomic and Topographic Vitreous and Vitreoretinal Interface Features in Proliferative Diabetic Vitreoretinopathy. Ophthalmology. 2020;17(2):249–257. (In Russ.) DOI:10.18008/1816-5095-2020-2-249-257.
15. Kislitsyna N.M., Shatskikh A.V., Dibirova S.M.,et. al. Macromicroscopic Method for Vitreous Body Anatomy Studying. Ophthalmology. 2022;19(1):123–132. (In Russ.). DOI:10.18008/1816-5095-2022-1-123-132.
16. N.M. Kislitsyna, S.V. Novikov. Anatomic and Topographic Vitreous and Vitreoretinal Interface Features during Chromovitrectomy of A, B, C Stages of Proliferative Diabetic Vitreoretinopathy (P. Kroll’s Classification of Proliferative Diabetic Vitreoretinopathy, 2007):Fyodorov’s Eye Micro. Diabetic Eye Disease. 2022; doi:10.5772/intechopen.101724.
