PURPOSE: A prospective, comparative, nonrandomized study to evaluate the efficacy of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with and without inner limiting membrane (ILM) peeling for persistent diffuse clinically significant macular edema. METHODS: Eighteen patients with persistent diffuse clinically significant macular edema despite laser photocoagulation were recruited for the study. Clinical assessment included determination of best-corrected visual acuity, fundus fluorescein angiography, optical coherence tomography, and perifoveal cone function testing. Eight patients underwent PPV with elevation and removal of the posterior hyaloid alone, and 10 patients underwent vitrectomy and ILM peeling. The follow-up was 12 months. RESULTS: Patients with ILM peeling had improvement in foveal thickness (P = 0.07) and significant improvement in the macular volume (P = 0.039) 12 months after surgery but did not have significant improvement in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study vision or perifoveal cone function. There was no significant difference in outcome parameters between the no peeling group and the ILM peeling group. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective, comparative study of PPV with and without ILM peeling for diffuse clinically significant macular edema, structural improvement was seen but with limited visual improvement after ILM peeling.
PURPOSE: A prospective, comparative, nonrandomized study to evaluate the efficacy of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with and without inner limiting membrane (ILM) peeling for persistent diffuse clinically significant macular edema. METHODS: Eighteen patients with persistent diffuse clinically significant macular edema despite laser photocoagulation were recruited for the study. Clinical assessment included determination of best-corrected visual acuity, fundus fluorescein angiography, optical coherence tomography, and perifoveal cone function testing. Eight patients underwent PPV with elevation and removal of the posterior hyaloid alone, and 10 patients underwent vitrectomy and ILM peeling. The follow-up was 12 months. RESULTS:Patients with ILM peeling had improvement in foveal thickness (P = 0.07) and significant improvement in the macular volume (P = 0.039) 12 months after surgery but did not have significant improvement in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study vision or perifoveal cone function. There was no significant difference in outcome parameters between the no peeling group and the ILM peeling group. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective, comparative study of PPV with and without ILM peeling for diffuse clinically significant macular edema, structural improvement was seen but with limited visual improvement after ILM peeling.
Authors: Yun Taek Kim; Se Woong Kang; Sang Jin Kim; Sung Min Kim; Song Ee Chung Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2011-12-10 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Julia A Haller; Haijing Qin; Rajendra S Apte; Roy R Beck; Neil M Bressler; David J Browning; Ronald P Danis; Adam R Glassman; Joseph M Googe; Craig Kollman; Andreas K Lauer; Mark A Peters; Margaret E Stockman Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2010-03-17 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: S Yoshitake; T Murakami; A Uji; K Ogino; T Horii; M Hata; S Arichika; K Nishijima; N Yoshimura Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2014-01-24 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: M Rinaldi; R dell'Omo; F Morescalchi; F Semeraro; E Gambicorti; F Cacciatore; F Chiosi; C Costagliola Journal: Int Ophthalmol Date: 2017-10-31 Impact factor: 2.031