International Ophthalmology

, Volume 38, Issue 4, pp 1575–1582 | Cite as

Comparative study of 27-gauge and 25-gauge vitrectomy performed as day surgery

  • Ryusaburo Mori
  • Saigen Naruse
  • Hiroyuki ShimadaEmail author
Original Paper



To compare postoperative outcomes of 27-gauge (G) and 25-G vitrectomy conducted as day surgery.


In total, 200 consecutive eyes that underwent primary vitrectomy (27-G in 100 eyes, 25-G in 100 eyes) were analyzed. 27-G vitrectomy was performed using a cut rate of 7500 cpm and 25-G vitrectomy using a cut rate of 5000 cpm.


The 27-G and 25-G groups did not differ significantly in underlying diseases and preoperative Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) score. The time required for vitrectomy was significantly longer in the 27-G group (35.3 vs. 29.8 min, P = 0.0013). Postoperative hypotony was observed in 0 and 3 patients, and ocular hypertension in 10 and 14 patients in the 27-G and 25-G groups, respectively, showing more stabilized postoperative ocular pressure in the 27-G group. Gain in ETDRS score was significantly better in the 27-G group (12.1 ± 20.2 letters) compared to the 25-G group (10.0 ± 21.3 letters) (P = 0.0323) at 1 month post-vitrectomy, but not significantly different at 3 and 6 months (P = 0.0686 and 0.0543). Rates of postoperative retinal detachment (1 vs. 1%) and vitreous hemorrhage (2 vs. 3%) were not different between two groups.


27-G vitrectomy requires longer operative time than 25-G, but using the 27-G system results in earlier visual improvement and stabilized ocular pressure.


Day surgery Hypotony Ocular hypertension Operative time Postoperative complications 25-Gauge vitrectomy 27-Gauge vitrectomy Visual acuity 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standard

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This retrospective study was approved by the Ethical Committee of the Nihon University School of Medicine (Number 20161203).

Informed consent

Informed consent for performing the procedures was obtained routinely from all the patients included in this study. For this retrospective study, formal consent of individual patients to be included in the study is not required.


  1. 1.
    Oshima Y, Wakabayashi T, Sato T et al (2010) A 27-gauge instrument system for transconjunctival sutureless microincision vitrectomy surgery. Ophthalmology 117(93–102):e2Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Osawa S, Oshima Y (2015) 27-Gauge vitrectomy. Dev Ophthalmol 54:54–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Khan MA, Shahlaee A, Toussaint B et al (2015) Outcomes of 27-gauge microincision vitrectomy surgery for posterior segment disease. Am J Ophthalmol 161(36–43):e2Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rizzo S, Barca F, Caporossi T et al (2015) Twenty-seven gauge vitrectomy for various vitreoretinal diseases. Retina 35:1273–1278CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rizzo S, Genovesi-Ebert F, Murri S et al (2006) 25-gauge, sutureless vitrectomy and standard 20-gauge pars plana vitrectomy in idiopathic epiretinal membrane surgery: a comparative pilot study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 244:472–479CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kadonosono K, Yamakawa T, Uchio E et al (2006) Comparison of visual function after epiretinal membrane removal by 20-gauge and 25-gaugevitrectomy. Am J Ophthalmol 142:513–515CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sandali O, El Sanharawi M, Lecuen N et al (2011) 25-, 23-, and 20-gauge vitrectomy in epiretinal membrane surgery: a comparative study of 553 cases. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 249:1811–1819CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Inoue Y, Kadonosono K, Yamakawa T et al (2009) Surgically-induced inflammation with 20-, 23-, and 25-gauge vitrectomy systems: an experimental study. Retina 29:477–480CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Okamoto F, Okamoto C, Sakata N et al (2007) Changes in corneal topography after 25-gauge transconjunctival sutureless vitrectomy versus after 20-gauge standard vitrectomy. Ophthalmology 114:2138–2141CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hikichi T, Matsumoto N, Ohtsuka H et al (2009) Comparison of one-year outcomes between 23- and 20-gauge vitrectomy for preretinal membrane. Am J Ophthalmol 147:639–643CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kim M, Park YS, Lee DH et al (2015) Comparison of surgical outcome of 23-gauge and 25-gauge microincision vitrectomy surgery for management of idiopathic epiretinal membrane in pseudophakic eyes. Retina 35:2115–2120CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Haas A, Seidel G, Steinbrugger I et al (2010) Twenty-three-gauge and 20-gauge vitrectomy in epiretinal membrane surgery. Retina 30:112–116CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mitsui K, Kogo J, Takeda H, Shiono A et al (2016) Comparative study of 27-gauge vs 25-gauge vitrectomy for epiretinal membrane. Eye 30:538–544CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shimada H, Nakashizuka H, Hattori T et al (2013) Reduction of vitreous contamination rate after 25-gauge vitrectomy by surface irrigation with 0.25% povidone–iodine. Retina 33:143–151CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shimada H, Nakashizuka H, Hattori T et al (2008) Conjunctival displacement to the corneal side for oblique-parallel insertion in 25-gauge vitrectomy. Eur J Ophthalmol 18:848–851CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shimada H, Nakashizuka H, Mori R et al (2006) 25-Gauge scleral tunnel transconjunctival vitrectomy. Am J Ophthalmol 142:871–873CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shimada H, Nakashizuka H, Hattori T et al (2008) Vitreous prolapse through the scleral wound in 25-gauge transconjunctival vitrectomy. Eur J Ophthalmol 18:659–662CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Diniz B, Ribeiro RM, Fernandes RB et al (2013) Fluidics in a dual pneumatic ultra high-speed vitreous cutter system. Ophthalmologica 229:15–20CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Watanabe A, Tsuzuki A, Arai K et al (2016) Treatment of dropped nucleus with a 27-gauge twin duty cycle vitreous cutter. Case Rep Ophthalmol 7:44–48CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ryusaburo Mori
    • 1
  • Saigen Naruse
    • 2
  • Hiroyuki Shimada
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of OphthalmologyNihon University HospitalChiyodakuJapan
  2. 2.Miyahara Ophthalmological ClinicSaitama CityJapan

Personalised recommendations