4.7 Article

Regional and sex differences in retinal detachment surgery: Japan-retinal detachment registry report

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-00186-w

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. JSPS KAKENHI [21H03095]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [21H03095] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found regional and sex differences in the treatment of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment in Japan, with men in certain regions more likely to undergo early surgical intervention, while women are less likely to receive it.
It is known that social factors affect the choice of treatments, and special attention has been paid to sex differences. The purpose of this study was to determine whether regional and sex differences exist in the treatment of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RD). We used Japan-RD Registry database of 2523 patients aged >= 40 years between February 2016 and March 2017 in 5 Japanese regions. Regional differences of patients' perioperative factors were analyzed. The factors affecting the proportion of patients who underwent surgery within one week of the onset, defined as early-surgery, were examined by logistic regression. We observed regional differences in perioperative factors, especially in the use of phacovitrectomy, general anesthesia, and air-tamponade, which was higher in certain regions. (Fisher's exact test, all P = 0.012) The proportion of early-surgery was significantly higher among men in Kyushu region (Odds ratio (OR) 1.83; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-3.12; P = 0.02), and it was also significantly higher after adjusting for covariates (OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.06-3.42; P = 0.02). Regional and sex differences exist in the treatment of RD in Japan. Although there was no significant differences in the anatomical outcomes, women in certain regions of Japan are less likely to receive early surgical intervention for RD.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available