- •Dedication
- •Preface
- •Acknowledgements
- •Contributors
- •Contents
- •1. Minimally Invasive Oculoplastic Surgery
- •1.1 General Points
- •1.2 Lower Lid Entropion
- •1.2.1 Introduction
- •1.2.2 Lower Lid Entropion Sutures
- •1.2.3 Lower Lid Entropion Botulinum Toxin
- •1.3 Lower Lid Ectropion
- •1.3.1 Introduction
- •1.3.2 The Royce Johnson Suture
- •1.3.3 The Pillar Tarsorrhaphy
- •1.4 Distichiasis
- •1.4.1 Introduction
- •1.4.2 Direct Excision of Lashes
- •1.5 Ptosis
- •1.5.1 Introduction
- •1.5.3 Anterior Approach – One Stitch Aponeurosis Repair
- •1.5.4 Supramid Brow Suspension
- •1.6 Lid Retraction
- •1.6.1 Introduction
- •1.6.2 Koornneef Blepharotomy
- •1.6.3 Botulinum Toxin
- •1.7 Lid Tumours
- •1.7.1 Mohs’ Micrographic Surgery
- •1.7.2 Lamella Sparing Tumour Excision
- •References
- •2. Minimally Invasive Conjunctival Surgery
- •2.1 Conjunctival Surgery
- •2.2 Conjunctivochalasis
- •2.2.1 Background of the Disease
- •2.2.2 Indication for Surgery
- •2.2.3 Basic Concept of Surgery
- •2.2.4 Surgical Procedure
- •2.2.5 Postoperative Follow-Up
- •2.3 Pterygium
- •2.3.1 Background of the Disease and the Concept of Minimally Invasive Surgery
- •2.3.2 Indication for Surgery
- •2.3.3 Basic Concept of Surgery
- •2.3.4 Surgical Procedures
- •2.3.5 A Biologic Adhesive for Sutureless Pterygium Surgery
- •2.3.6 Postoperative Follow-Up
- •2.4 Limbal and Conjuntival Dermoids
- •2.4.1 Background of the Disease
- •2.4.2 Basic Concept of Surgery
- •2.4.3 Surgical Procedure
- •2.4.4 Postoperative Follow-Up
- •2.5 Strabismus Surgery
- •2.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •3. Minimally Invasive Lacrimal Surgery
- •3.1 Introduction
- •3.1.1 Causes of Stenoses of the Lacrimal Drainage System
- •3.1.3 General Remarks Regarding Surgical Management
- •3.2 Endonasal Endoscopic (Microscopic) Dacryocystorhinostomy (EDCR)
- •3.2.1 Indication for EDCR
- •3.2.2 Surgical Technique
- •3.2.3 Silicone Stenting for EDCR
- •3.2.2.1 Silicone “Cones” (Lacrimal Duct Stent, Bess, Berlin)
- •3.2.4 Use of Mitomycin C for EDCR
- •3.2.5 Post-Operative Care After EDCR
- •3.2.6 Results of EDCR
- •3.3 Endonasal Endoscopic Laser Dacryocystorhinostomy (ELDCR)
- •3.3.1 Indications for ELDCR
- •3.3.2 Contraindications for ELDCR
- •3.3.3 Surgical Technique for ELDCR
- •3.3.4 Potential Problems with ELDCR
- •3.3.5 Post-Operative Care After ELDCR
- •3.3.6 Results of ELDCR
- •3.4 Dacryoendoscopy with Transcanalicular Laserdacryoplasty (TLDP)
- •3.4.1 Indication for TLDP
- •3.4.2 Contraindication for TLDP
- •3.4.3 Surgical Technique for TLDP
- •3.4.4 Results of TLDP
- •3.5 Microdrill Dacryoplasty (MDP)
- •3.5.1 Indication for MDP
- •3.5.2 Contraindication for MDP
- •3.5.3 MDP Procedure
- •3.5.4 Results of MDP
- •3.6 Balloon Dilatation
- •3.6.1 Indications for Balloon Dilatation
- •3.6.2 Anaesthesia for Balloon Dilatation
- •3.6.3 Surgical Technique with 2 mm or 3 mm Balloon for Incomplete Stenosis
- •3.6.3.1 Post-Operative Care
- •3.6.3.2 Complications
- •3.6.3.3 Results
- •3.6.4.1 Post-Operative Care
- •3.6.4.2 Results
- •3.6.4.3 Complications
- •3.7 Stent Placement
- •3.7.1 Indications for Stent Placement
- •3.7.3 Surgical Technique for Stent Placement
- •3.7.5 Results of Stent Placement
- •References
- •4. Minimally Invasive Corneal Surgery
- •4.1 Penetrating Keratoplasty
- •4.1.1 Introduction
- •4.1.2 Indications
- •4.1.3 Preoperative Evaluation of the Keratoplasty Patient
- •4.1.4 Preparation for Penetrating Keratoplasty
- •4.1.4.1 Eyelid Speculum
- •4.1.4.2 Scleral Fixation Rings
- •4.1.4.3 Large and Fine-Tipped Needle Holder
- •4.1.4.4 Toothed Forceps
- •4.1.4.5 Trephine Blades
- •4.1.4.6 Radial Marker
- •4.1.4.7 Cornea Punch
- •4.1.4.8 Cutting Block
- •4.1.4.9 Scissors
- •4.1.4.10 Cannulas and Blades
- •4.1.5 Preoperative Medications
- •4.1.6 Penetrating Keratoplasty Surgical Procedure
- •4.1.6.1 Placement of the Scleral Fixation Ring
- •4.1.6.2 Marking of the Host Cornea
- •4.1.6.3 Sizing of the Trephine
- •4.1.6.4 Trephination of the Host Cornea
- •4.1.6.5 Trephination of the Donor Cornea
- •4.1.6.6 Removal of the Host Cornea
- •4.1.6.7 Placement of the Donor Cornea Tissue in the Host Stromal Bed
- •4.1.6.8 Placement of the Cardinal Sutures
- •4.1.6.9 Completion of Suturing
- •4.1.6.10 Suture Techniques
- •4.1.6.11 Subconjunctival Medications
- •4.1.7 Intraoperative Complications
- •4.1.7.1 Scleral Perforation
- •4.1.7.2 Damage to the Donor Button
- •4.1.7.4 Posterior Capsule Rupture
- •4.1.7.5 Vitreous Loss
- •4.1.7.6 Anterior Chamber Hemorrhage
- •4.1.7.7 Choroidal Hemorrhage
- •4.1.8 Postoperative Management
- •4.1.8.1 Postoperative Immunosuppressive Regimen
- •4.1.9 Postoperative Complications
- •4.1.9.1 Wound Leaks
- •4.1.9.2 Epithelial Defects
- •4.1.9.3 Suture-Related Problems
- •4.1.9.4 Increased Intraocular Pressure
- •4.1.9.5 Post-Keratoplasty Astigmatism
- •4.1.10.1 Wedge Resections and Compression Sutures
- •4.1.10.2 Relaxing Incisions
- •4.1.10.3 LASIK
- •4.1.10.4 Photorefractive Keratectomy with Mitomycin C
- •4.1.11 Corneal Allograft Rejection
- •4.1.11.1 Host Risk Factors
- •4.1.11.2 Vascularized Corneas
- •4.1.11.3 Prior Graft Loss
- •4.1.11.4 Graft Diameter
- •4.1.11.5 Anterior Synechiae
- •4.1.11.6 Previous Intraocular Surgery
- •4.1.11.7 Herpes Simplex
- •4.1.12 Treatment of Allograft Rejection
- •4.1.13 Large Diameter Penetrating Keratoplasty
- •4.1.14 Summary
- •References
- •4.2 Descemet’s Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty
- •4.2.1 Introduction
- •4.2.2 Descemet’s Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty Surgical Technique
- •4.2.2.1 Donor Cornea Preparation
- •4.2.2.2 Host Cornea Preparation
- •4.2.2.3 Insertion of the Donor Cornea
- •4.2.3 Postoperative Medications
- •4.2.4 Donor Dislocation Risks
- •4.2.5 Repositioning Donor Tissue
- •4.2.6 Treatment of Rejection Episodes
- •4.2.7 Visual and Refractive Outcomes
- •4.2.8 Other Complications
- •4.2.9 Summary
- •References
- •4.3 Pterygium
- •4.3.1 Introduction
- •4.3.2 Treatment of Pterygium
- •4.3.3 Surgical Technique
- •4.3.3.1 Removal of the Pterygium
- •4.3.3.2 Harvesting the Conjunctival Autograft
- •4.3.3.3 Securing the Conjunctival Autograft
- •4.3.3.4 Fibrin Glue vs. Nylon Sutures
- •4.3.4 Postoperative Management
- •4.3.5 Recurrent Pterygium
- •4.3.6 Other Techniques in Pterygium Removal
- •4.3.6.1 Bare Scleral Technique
- •4.3.6.2 Adjunctive Agents
- •Mitomycin C
- •Beta-Irradiation
- •4.3.6.3 Amniotic Membrane Transplantation
- •4.3.7 Complications in Pterygium Removal
- •4.3.8 Summary
- •References
- •5. Minimally Invasive Refractive Surgery
- •5.1 Trends in Refractive Surgery
- •5.2 Introduction
- •5.3 Cornea Refractive Surgery
- •5.3.1 Laser In Situ Keratomileusis (LASIK)
- •5.3.1.1 Advances in Flap Creation Technology
- •Microkeratomes
- •Femtosecond Laser
- •5.3.1.2 Technological Advances in Laser Delivery Platforms
- •5.3.1.3 Faster Excimer Lasers
- •5.3.1.4 Reduction of Collateral Thermal Tissue Damage
- •5.3.1.5 Advanced Eye Trackers
- •5.3.2 PRK and Advanced Surface Ablations (ASA)
- •5.3.2.1 Decrease Thermal Load on the Cornea
- •5.3.2.2 Use of Wound-Healing Modulators
- •5.3.2.3 Trend Towards EPI-LASIK
- •5.3.3 Summary
- •5.4 Intraocular Refractive Surgery
- •5.4.1 Phakic Intraocular Lens Surgery
- •5.4.1.1 Advances in Diagnostic Equipment
- •5.4.1.2 Types of Phakic Intraocular Lens
- •5.4.1.3 Kelman-Duet Phakic Intraocular Lens
- •Lens Design
- •Surgical Technique
- •Pre-Operative Preparation
- •Operative Procedure
- •Post-Operative Care
- •Results
- •Refractive Outcomes
- •Corneal Endothelium
- •5.4.1.4 Visian Implantable Collamer Lens
- •Lens Design
- •Surgical Technique
- •Pre-Operative Preparation
- •Operative Procedure
- •Post-Operative Care
- •5.4.1.5 Results
- •5.4.2 Summary
- •5.5 Lens and Cataract Surgery
- •5.5.2 The Ideal MICS Intraocular Lens
- •5.5.2.1 Aspheric Intraocular Lenses
- •5.5.2.2 Toric Intraocular Lenses
- •5.5.2.3 ACRI.LISA 366D and ACRI.LISA TORIC 466TD
- •Lens Design
- •5.5.2.4 Surgical Technique
- •Operative Procedure
- •Post-Operative Care
- •5.5.2.5 Results
- •5.5.3 Summary
- •5.6 The Future: Beyond the Horizon of Refractive Surgery Today
- •Reference
- •6. Minimally Invasive Strabismus Surgery
- •6.1 Introduction
- •6.2 Nonsurgical Treatment
- •6.4 Rectus Muscle Procedures
- •6.4.1 MISS Rectus Muscle Recession
- •6.4.2 MISS Rectus Muscle Plication
- •6.4.3 Parks’ Rectus Muscle Recession
- •6.4.4 Parks’ Rectus Muscle Plication
- •6.4.5 MISS Rectus Muscle Posterior Fixation Suture
- •6.4.7 MISS Rectus Muscle Repeat Surgery
- •6.4.8 MISS Rectus Muscle Transposition Surgery
- •6.5 Oblique Muscle Procedures
- •6.5.1 MISS Inferior Oblique Muscle Recession
- •6.5.2 MISS Inferior Oblique Muscle Plication
- •6.5.3 MISS Superior Oblique Muscle Recession
- •6.5.4 MISS Superior Oblique Muscle Plication
- •6.5.6 Mühlendyck’s Partial Posterior Superior Oblique Tenectomy for Congenital Brown’s Syndrome
- •6.6 Postoperative Handling
- •6.7.1 Intraoperative Complications
- •6.7.2 Postoperative Complications
- •6.8 Suggestions on How to Start Doing MISS
- •6.8.1 Instruments Suitable for MISS
- •6.8.2 Suture Materials Used for MISS
- •6.8.3 General Remarks Regarding MISS Procedures
- •6.8.4 MISS Dose–Response Relationships
- •References
- •7. Minimally Invasive Iris Surgery
- •7.1 Instrumentation
- •7.2 Sutures
- •7.3 Surgical Principles of Iris Suturing
- •7.3.1 Mobilization
- •7.3.2 Intraocular Suturing and Knot Tying
- •7.3.3 Reattachment of Iris to Sclera
- •7.3.4 Pupil Repair
- •7.3.5 Adjunctive Pupil Repair Techniques
- •References
- •8. Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery
- •Introduction
- •8.1.1 Introduction to Deep Sclerectomy
- •8.1.2 Anesthesia
- •8.1.3 Surgical Technique
- •8.1.3.1 Preparation
- •8.1.3.3 Deep Flap Preparation
- •8.1.3.5 Peeling of Schlemm’s Canal and Juxtacanalicular Meshwork
- •8.1.3.6 Drainage Device
- •8.1.3.7 Wound Closure
- •8.1.4 Postoperative Management and Medication
- •8.1.4.1 Medication
- •8.1.4.2 Management
- •8.1.5 Adjunctive Treatments
- •8.1.5.1 Bleb Needling
- •8.1.5.2 Nd:YAG Goniopuncture
- •8.1.6 Complications and Management
- •8.1.6.1 General
- •8.1.6.2 Perioperative Complications
- •8.1.6.3 Early Postoperative Complications
- •8.1.6.4 Late Postoperative Complications
- •Open-Angle Glaucoma
- •Pigmentary Glaucoma
- •Pseudoexfoliation Glaucoma
- •Aphakic Glaucoma
- •Sturge–Weber Syndrome
- •Glaucoma Secondary to Uveitis
- •Congenital and Juvenile Glaucoma
- •Narrow-Angle Glaucoma
- •Posttrauma Angle-Recession Glaucoma
- •Neovascular Glaucoma
- •Narrow-Angle Glaucoma in a Young Patient
- •Pseudophakic Glaucoma with an A/C IOL
- •8.2.1.4 Preoperative Considerations
- •8.2.2 Anesthesia
- •8.2.4 Postoperative Management and Medication
- •8.2.5 Outcomes and Comparison with Other Techniques
- •8.2.6 Complications and Management
- •8.2.6.1 General
- •8.2.6.4 Summary and Key Points
- •References
- •8.3 New Minimally Invasive, Sclerothalamotomy Ab Interno Surgical Technique
- •8.3.1 Introduction to the Sclerothalamotomy Ab Interno
- •8.3.1.1 Indications for the Sclerothalamotomy Ab Interno
- •8.3.2 Anesthesia
- •8.3.3 Surgical Technique
- •8.3.3.1 Preparation
- •8.3.3.2 Diathermy Probe Insertion
- •8.3.4 Postoperative Management and Medication
- •8.3.5 Outcomes and Comparison with Other Techniques
- •8.3.6 Complications and Management
- •8.3.6.1 General
- •8.3.6.3 Conclusions
- •References
- •Type of Glaucoma
- •Stage of Glaucoma
- •Combined Surgery
- •8.4.2 Anesthesia
- •8.4.3 Surgical Technique
- •8.4.3.1 Preparation
- •8.4.3.2 Implantation of the Micro-Bypass Stent
- •8.4.4 Postoperative Management and Medication
- •8.4.5 Outcomes and Combination with Other Techniques
- •8.4.5.1 Trabecular Implant in Refractory Glaucoma Patients
- •8.4.6 Conclusions
- •References
- •9. Minimally Invasive Cataract Surgery
- •10. Minimally Invasive Vitreoretinal Surgery
- •10.1 Introduction
- •10.2 Microincision Vitrectomy
- •10.2.1 Models of Wound Architecture
- •10.2.2 Vitrectomy
- •10.2.3 Adjuncts
- •10.2.4 Common Surgical Techniques
- •10.2.4.1 Macular Surgery
- •10.2.4.2 Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy
- •10.2.4.3 Retinal Detachment
- •10.2.4.4 Pediatric Vitreoretinal Surgery
- •10.2.5 Complications
- •10.2.6 Future Developments in Minimally Invasive Vitrectomy
- •10.3 Endoscopic Vitreoretinal Surgery
- •10.3.1 Introduction
- •10.3.2 History and Development of Endoscopic Ophthalmic Surgery
- •10.3.3 The Endoscope
- •10.3.4 Applications of Intraocular Endoscopy
- •10.3.4.1 Media Opacity
- •10.3.4.3 PVR and Subretinal Surgery
- •10.3.4.4 Retained Lens Fragments
- •10.3.4.5 Anterior and Retrolental Vitrectomy in Malignant Glaucoma
- •10.3.4.5 Sutured IOL and ECP
- •10.3.5 Limitations and Challenges
- •10.4 Future Directions of Minimally Invasive Vitreoretinal Surgery
- •References
- •INDEX
10 Minimally Invasive Vitreoretinal Surgery |
225 |
longer [97]. In this approach, only two incisions are necessary – one for illumination and one for a forceps that can be used to elevate the edge of the epiretinal membrane and grasping it. The smaller fiber must be connected to a very bright light source, and the tip of the light fiber must be modified to expand the angle of illumination.
The utilization of small-gauge vitreoretinal surgery has gradually increased, and many surgeons have advocated that at least 23 gauge will become the new standard for vitreoretinal surgery [98–101]. The advantages of the transconjunctival sutureless approach seem to be mainly intangible ones at this time. The main advantages – reduced postoperative pain [102], transient reduction of corneal astigmatism [103, 104], and faster recovery time – are difficult to quantify and measure. However, patients do seem to appreciate the advantages and frequently comment how there was no pain or discomfort. There are relatively few randomized clinical studies that prospectively measure the advantages of small-gauge vitrectomy compared to the conventional 20-gauge approach [15, 23, 59, 105–109]. Critics indicate that the small-gauge instrumentation is more costly, and presents an unacceptable rate of endophthalmitis [110, 111]. Until tangible advantages can be demonstrated, universal acceptance by retinal surgeons will be delayed. Continued advancements in technology will also convince surgeons that the smaller gauge format will provide the same or better performance than the conventional 20-gauge system.
10.3 Endoscopic Vitreoretinal Surgery
10.3.1 Introduction
The first endoscopic vitreoretinal procedure was described in 1934 by Thorpe for removal of a nonmetallic intravitreal foreign body [112, 113]. In the intervening 75 years, the application of endoscopic viewing systems had primarily been limited to foreign body extraction [113, 114]. Especially with the development of modern vitrectomy techniques and technology pioneered by Machemer, the uses for endoscopes that were unwieldy and difficult to navigate in the intraocular cavity have been seemingly few. However, technical advances have allowed for improved image
resolution and transmission and smaller and more flexible instrumentation for improved maneuverability and visualization of the eye as well as the ability to use existing surgical incisions [115–117]. Consequently, there is an expanding set of applications for endoscopy in many types of ophthalmic surgery [112, 118].
10.3.2History and Development of Endoscopic Ophthalmic Surgery
Early intraocular endoscopy required external fixation, with the surgeon looking through a rigid scope composed of classical lenses [113, 119, 120]. The development of fiber-optic technology allowed for flexible endoscopes which were both easier to manipulate and maneuver, and allowed for images to be seen from a distance. The charge-coupled device was first developed in 1983, allowing an image to be transmitted electronically to a monitor or video recording device [121]. In addition, improved ability to manufacture optical fibers enabled both smaller and higher resolution endoscopes.
10.3.3 The Endoscope
Endoscopes using classical lenses have a minimum diameter of 1.3–2.0 mm, too large for use in ophthalmic surgery [113, 119]. Ophthalmic endoscopes currently in use typically employ one of two different modes of image transmission. Fused fiber-optic endoscopes transmit segmented images (image blocks or pixels partitioned into homogeneous groups such as color) through single fibers, allowing for long-distance transmission. However, image resolution is often limited by image segmentation. Gradient-index (GRIN) endoscopes, in contrast, transmit whole images through a single rod of varying refractive indices, allowing for refraction and transmission of light across flat surfaces without the minimal size limitations of classical lenses [119]. Both types of endoscopes are small enough to fit through a standard 20-gauge vitrectomy incision. However, GRIN lenses are available with a much smaller diameter of 0.35 or 0.5 mm and can be paired with two additional channels for illumination and laser and/or irrigation/aspiration, for a total