Discussion
The classification of retinal detachment is currently still based on many objective criteria such as duration of symptoms and funduscopic macular status. Patients often cannot remember the exact time of onset of symptoms and the process of retinal detachment varies greatly. Due to the large number of objective disturbing factors, a difficult comparability results and some questions remain unanswered. The optimal timing for surgical intervention with the best visual outcome in patients with retinal detachment still remains uncertain.9 10 12–15 This new grading system is the first OCT-based classification for preoperatively evaluating the macular region during retinal detachment. This new objective grading system is easy and fast to use and could be a new preoperative standard in clinical routines and studies.
OCT technology enables detecting a small amount of subretinal fluid that can potentially elude fundoscopic evaluation. This raises the question of ‘How off is off?’, and what amount and duration of subfoveal fluid or other preoperative signs are relevant to the postoperative visual outcomes and indicate the best time for surgical intervention.
Previous studies mainly considered only the symptom duration or the time until surgery and only differentiated between macula-on and macula-off detachments, while the extent or intensity of the subretinal fluid was not or was only slightly considered.16–18 Some publications described the preoperative and postoperative retinal changes in patients with macula-off retinal detachment, but no standardised classification exists for macula-on or macula-off detachments.19–21
Macula-off retinal detachment is commonly thought to lead to lower postoperative visual acuity and must be re-evaluated using this precise OCT classification. Our results showed that a small amount of subretinal fluid (grade 3a) can still result in good postoperative visual acuity. Even a centrally detached macula with a detachment of >250 µm and a bad initial BCVA can benefit significantly from surgery. Therefore, our results suggest that even a grade 3b macula-off detachment should undergo surgery as soon as possible.
In retinal detachment studies, the macular region is currently evaluated via funduscopic classification. Most older studies showed that delayed surgery led to significantly lower postoperative visual outcomes.12 22 23 Frings et al showed that surgery within the first 3 days postdetachment had better outcomes than did surgery between 10 and 30 days after symptoms appeared.5
Our data demonstrate that even patients with a distinctive detached macula (grades 3b and 4) have significant gains in visual acuity up to reading vision. This is because all retinal detachments undergo surgery within the first 24–48 hours after presentation, most within the first 12 hours. Our data also suggest that even macula-off retinal detachments should be treated as soon as possible, and timely interventions have positive psychological effects for the patient.
We found that a small amount of subretinal fluid (grade 3a) directly under the fovea did not strongly influence BCVA. Previously, only Matsui et al postulated a lower visual outcome for central macula detachments higher than 1000 µm in the OCT.16 Our data indicate that a 250 µm foveal detachment significantly affects the initial BCVA but can still lead to an improved BCVA if treated early. However, there is very little literature on the amount of subretinal fluid associated with retinal damage and therefore our work is very important as this factor is not considered in current studies. Furthermore, it should be noted that the macular detachment plays an important role, and the structural changes in the retina in the OCT already have an influence on the outcome.24
Interestingly, our work showed that patients with a grade 1 retinal detachment sometimes had a worse outcome than patients with higher grades. The fact that all patients were operated within 48 hours may explain these unexpected results. Therefore, we believe that future multicentre studies will play an important role in better interpreting the results.
Certainly, it would be important in the future to include an even larger number of patients in order to have a more balanced group distribution of the different stages, which would allow a better significance. A further limitation of our study is certainly the short follow-up period and the fact that we did not include patients who did not receive OCT preoperatively, in order to better demonstrate the strengths of the OCT grading versus the classic observer. We are aware of the fact that the duration of symptoms is seen in other studies as a predictive factor for the outcome. However, the duration of symptoms is often very subjective and therefore we believe that an objective grading system at the initial presentation of the patient is useful.
Retinal surgeons need a more precise method for determining the best time for surgery. Knowing the exact extent of the subretinal fluid and time for the surgical intervention is crucial. One crucial factor in all these studies is that all patients with a fulminant progress of the retinal detachment had earlier consultations with an ophthalmologist than did patients with slow and shallow subretinal detachment, which may deeply affect visual outcome results.
This new uniform OCT grading system is standardised and could be useful for upcoming studies on retinal detachment to enable making between-study comparisons.