Comparative study of 27-gauge vs 25-gauge vitrectomy for epiretinal membrane

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to compare 27-gauge (27G) with 25-gauge (25G) microincision vitrectomy in patients with epiretinal membrane (ERM).ParticipantsSeventy-four eyes of 66 patients undergoing 3-port pars plana vitrectomy using 27G or 25G instrumentation.MethodsSeventy-four eyes of 66 patients with ERM, who underwent 27G or 25G microincision vitrectomy were prospectively evaluated.ResultsThe mean operation time for vitrectomy was significantly longer in the 27G group than in the 25G group (9.9±3.5 vs 6.2±2.7 min, respectively, P<0.0001). No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of the mean operation time for ERM–inner limiting membrane peeling (27G vs 25G: 20.2±9.9 vs 16.1±9.3 min, P=0.14), although the time for vitreous cutting was longer in the 27G group (9.9±3.5 vs 6.2±2.7 min, respectively, P<0.0001). The flare value, intraocular pressure (IOP), and rate of hypotony 1 day after surgery did not differ between the 27G and 25G groups (flare value: 18.7 vs 17.2; IOP: 8.8 vs 9.7 mm Hg; rate of hypotony: 30 vs 35%, respectively). There was no significant difference in the surgically induced astigmatism between the two groups in the follow-up period. The mean time required for wound closure did not show a significant difference between the 27G and 25G groups (7.7 vs 8.6 weeks, respectively).ConclusionThe 27G system is as safe and useful for ERM vitrectomy as the 25G system. Based on its potential, further improvement of 27G instruments could result in greater efficiency.