Ji Woong Lee1, In Taek Kim. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Pusan, Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare visual acuity and macular morphology after epiretinal membrane (ERM) removal with and without internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling. METHODS: We studied a retrospective interventional case series of 40 eyes in 40 patients with ERM. All patients underwent standard three-port pars plana vitrectomy. In 19 eyes, the ERM alone was removed. In 21 eyes, the ERM was removed and ILM peeling was performed. RESULTS: Mean best-corrected visual acuity improved significantly in both the non-ILM peeling and the ILM peeling groups (P = 0.001, P = 0.000). Mean central macular thickness (CMT) decreased significantly in both groups (P = 0.001, P = 0.001). However, there was a significant difference in postoperative CMT between the two groups (P = 0.025). The mean postoperative CMT was significantly higher in the ILM peeling group than in the non-ILM peeling group. Sixteen eyes (84.2%) in the non-ILM peeling group had a normal foveal contour with a foveal depression on postoperative optical coherence tomography (OCT), while nine eyes (42.9%) in the ILM peeling group had a foveal depression (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative OCT revealed that thickening of the macula with loss of the normal foveal contour was more frequent in the ILM peeling group. However, these morphological differences did not result in functional differences in terms of visual outcome.
PURPOSE: To compare visual acuity and macular morphology after epiretinal membrane (ERM) removal with and without internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling. METHODS: We studied a retrospective interventional case series of 40 eyes in 40 patients with ERM. All patients underwent standard three-port pars plana vitrectomy. In 19 eyes, the ERM alone was removed. In 21 eyes, the ERM was removed and ILM peeling was performed. RESULTS: Mean best-corrected visual acuity improved significantly in both the non-ILM peeling and the ILM peeling groups (P = 0.001, P = 0.000). Mean central macular thickness (CMT) decreased significantly in both groups (P = 0.001, P = 0.001). However, there was a significant difference in postoperative CMT between the two groups (P = 0.025). The mean postoperative CMT was significantly higher in the ILM peeling group than in the non-ILM peeling group. Sixteen eyes (84.2%) in the non-ILM peeling group had a normal foveal contour with a foveal depression on postoperative optical coherence tomography (OCT), while nine eyes (42.9%) in the ILM peeling group had a foveal depression (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative OCT revealed that thickening of the macula with loss of the normal foveal contour was more frequent in the ILM peeling group. However, these morphological differences did not result in functional differences in terms of visual outcome.
Authors: A Sivalingam; R C Eagle; J S Duker; G C Brown; W E Benson; W H Annesley; J Federman Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 1990-11 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: J Hillenkamp; P Saikia; F Gora; H G Sachs; C P Lohmann; J Roider; W Bäumler; V-P Gabel Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Samantha Fraser-Bell; Magdalena Guzowski; Elena Rochtchina; Jie Jin Wang; Paul Mitchell Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Francesco Semeraro; Francesco Morescalchi; Sarah Duse; Elena Gambicorti; Andrea Russo; Ciro Costagliola Journal: J Ophthalmol Date: 2015-09-03 Impact factor: 1.909