Literature DB >> 21051731

Internal limiting membrane peeling versus no peeling for idiopathic full-thickness macular hole: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

Noemi Lois1, Jennifer Burr, John Norrie, Luke Vale, Jonathan Cook, Alison McDonald, Charles Boachie, Laura Ternent, Gladys McPherson.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine whether internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling is effective and cost effective compared with no peeling in patients with idiopathic stage 2 or 3 full-thickness maculay hole (FTMH).
METHODS: This was a pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled trial. Eligible participants from nine centers were randomized to ILM peeling or no peeling (1:1 ratio) in addition to phacovitrectomy, including detachment and removal of the posterior hyaloid and gas tamponade. The primary outcome was distance visual acuity (VA) at 6 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes included hole closure, distance VA at other time points, near VA, contrast sensitivity, reading speed, reoperations, complications, resource use, and participant-reported health status, visual function, and costs.
RESULTS: Of 141 participants randomized in nine centers, 127 (90%) completed the 6-month follow-up. Nonstatistically significant differences in distance visual acuity at 6 months were found between groups (mean difference, 4.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.3 to 9.8; P = 0.063). There was a significantly higher rate of hole closure in the ILM-peel group (56 [84%] vs. 31 [48%]) at 1 month (odds ratio [OR], 6.23; 95% CI, 2.64-14.73; P < 0.001) with fewer reoperations (8 [12%] vs. 31 [48%]) performed by 6 months (OR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.05-0.34; P < 0.001). Peeling the ILM is likely to be cost effective.
CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence of a difference in distance VA after the ILM peeling and no-ILM peeling techniques. An important benefit in favor of no ILM peeling was ruled out. Given the higher anatomic closure and lower reoperation rates in the ILM-peel group, ILM peeling seems to be the treatment of choice for idiopathic stage 2 to 3 FTMH. (Clinical Trials.gov number, NCT00286507.).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21051731     DOI: 10.1167/iovs.10-6287

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci        ISSN: 0146-0404            Impact factor:   4.799


  72 in total

1.  Glial proliferation after vitrectomy for a macular hole: a spectral domain optical coherence tomography study.

Authors:  Jaeryung Oh; Sun Mo Yang; Yong Min Choi; Seong-Woo Kim; Kuhl Huh
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-05-24       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Reduction of thickness of ganglion cell complex after internal limiting membrane peeling during vitrectomy for idiopathic macular hole.

Authors:  T Baba; S Yamamoto; R Kimoto; T Oshitari; E Sato
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2012-08-17       Impact factor: 3.775

3.  Factors associated with persistent subfoveal fluid and complete macular hole closure in the PIONEER study.

Authors:  Justis P Ehlers; Yuji Itoh; Lucy T Xu; Peter K Kaiser; Rishi P Singh; Sunil K Srivastava
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2014-12-18       Impact factor: 4.799

4.  Retained silicone tip of diamond-dusted membrane scraper during vitrectomy in a valved cannula system.

Authors:  V Felcida; N Kumar; R Haynes; S Habal; A K Tyagi
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2015-01-16       Impact factor: 3.775

5.  Reply to Dr Soong and Mr Saha.

Authors:  T Baba; S Yamamoto
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2013-01-18       Impact factor: 3.775

6.  Foveola nonpeeling internal limiting membrane surgery to prevent inner retinal damages in early stage 2 idiopathic macula hole.

Authors:  Tzyy-Chang Ho; Chung-May Yang; Jen-Shang Huang; Chang-Hao Yang; Muh-Shy Chen
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-03-23       Impact factor: 3.117

7.  Asymmetrical steepening of the foveal contour after macular hole surgery with internal limiting membrane peeling.

Authors:  Kouichi Ohta; Atsuko Sato; Nami Senda; Emi Fukui
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-06-23       Impact factor: 2.447

8.  Comparisons of focal macular electroretinograms after indocyanine green-, brilliant blue G-, or triamcinolone acetonide-assisted macular hole surgery.

Authors:  Shigeki Machida; Tomoharu Nishimura; Takayuki Ohzeki; Ken-Ichi Murai; Daijiro Kurosaka
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-09-07       Impact factor: 3.117

9.  Central mfERG amplitude ratio as a predictor for visual outcome of macular hole surgery.

Authors:  Renata Moreto; Ana Claudia Brancato De Lucca Perches; Felipe Almeida; Rodrigo Jorge; André Messias; Katrin Gekeler
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-09-03       Impact factor: 2.379

10.  Comparisons of cone electroretinograms after indocyanine green-, brilliant blue G-, or triamcinolone acetonide-assisted macular hole surgery.

Authors:  Shigeki Machida; Yoshiharu Toba; Tomoharu Nishimura; Takayuki Ohzeki; Ken-ichi Murai; Daijiro Kurosaka
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-03-02       Impact factor: 3.117

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.