Retrospective Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2021.
World J Clin Cases. Sep 16, 2021; 9(26): 7729-7737
Published online Sep 16, 2021. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v9.i26.7729
Table 1 Primary ocular diseases of participating patients

WCP (n = 31)
CA (n = 17)
PCP (n = 25)
PDR1946
Rhegmatogenous RD (PVR C)828
Giant retinal detachment212
Recurrent RD122
RD of high myopia103
Ocular trauma054
Endophthalmitis030
Table 2 Comparison of visual acuity among the three groups (mean ± SD, LogMAR)
GroupNumber of eyesPreoperative
1 mo after stage I
1 mo after stage II
WCP311.04 ± 0.381.39 ± 0.520.93 ± 0.28
CA171.14 ± 0.531.29 ± 0.550.94 ± 0.45
PCP251.26 ± 0.581.41 ± 0.420.99 ± 0.45
F1.390.320.16
P value0.260.730.85
Table 3 Comparison of best-corrected visual acuity among the three groups after intraocular lens implantation
WCP CAPCPP value
BCVA improved29 (93.55)16 (94.12)24 (96)0.92
BCVA deteriorated2 (0.06)1 (5.88)1 (4)-
Table 4 Comparisons of surgery time of stage I and stage II among the three groups (min)
GroupStage I
Stage II
mean ± SD
P value
mean ± SD
P value
WCP72.74 ± 26.900.6185.58 ± 1.190.031a
CA78.91 ± 16.0515.38 ± 2.04
PCP78.16 ± 26.395.74 ± 1.32
Table 5 Comparison of surgery time of stage II between groups
Group
P value
95%CI
WCP vs PCP0.954-0.95-0.626
WCP vs CA< 0.01-10.68-(-8.92)
PCP vs CA< 0.01-10.56-(-8.72)