Literature DB >> 23222496

Management of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment with coexisting macular hole: a comparison of vitrectomy with and without internal limiting membrane peeling.

Dhananjay Shukla1, Jay Kalliath, Karthik Srinivasan, Nithya Neelakantan, Anand Rajendran, Kannan B Naresh, Umesh C Behera.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of vitrectomy with or without internal limiting membrane peeling for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment and coexisting macular hole.
METHODS: Thirty-one consecutive patients (31 eyes) with macula-off retinal detachment, peripheral breaks and a coexisting macular hole were prospectively enrolled over a 3-year period. All patients underwent vitrectomy with encirclage and gas or silicone oil tamponade. The 17 patients who underwent internal limiting membrane peeling for macular hole constituted Group A and the remaining 14 patients constituted Group B. The main outcome measures were change in best-corrected visual acuity, retinal reattachment, macular hole closure, and type of macular hole closure.
RESULTS: The two groups were comparable in preoperative demographics and clinical parameters. The retinal reattachment rate was 100% in both the groups. Macular hole closed in 14 of 17 eyes (82.4%) in Group A and 13 of 14 eyes (92.9%) in Group B (P = 0.607). A flat-open configuration of macular hole closure was observed in 8 of 14 eyes (57%) in Group A and 3 of 13 eyes (27.5%) in Group B (P = 0.188). Mean logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution best-corrected visual acuity improved to 1.0 ± 0.3 (20/200; range, 0.8-1.7) in Group A and 0.6 ± 0.2 (20/80; range, 0.3-1.1) in Group B (P < 0.0001). Ten patients achieved best-corrected visual acuity of ≥ 20/80 in Group B and none in Group A (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: The anatomical and visual outcomes of vitrectomy without internal limiting membrane peeling in macular hole in retinal detachment were similar to or better than the outcomes obtained with internal limiting membrane peeling.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23222496     DOI: 10.1097/IAE.0b013e31826b6748

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Retina        ISSN: 0275-004X            Impact factor:   4.256


  5 in total

1.  On the safety profile of Ocublue Plus (BBG 0.05%).

Authors:  D Shukla; J Singh
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2014-05-30       Impact factor: 3.775

2.  Human Amniotic Membrane Plug for Macular Holes Coexisting with Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment.

Authors:  Mahmoud Alaa Abouhussein; Samir Mohamed Elbaha; Mohsen Aboushousha
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-08-24

3.  Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling vs no peeling for Macular Hole-induced Retinal Detachment (MHRD): a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jing Su; Xinquan Liu; Lijun Zheng; Hongping Cui
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-06-20       Impact factor: 2.209

4.  INTERNAL LIMITING MEMBRANE PEELING VERSUS NONPEELING TO PREVENT EPIRETINAL MEMBRANE DEVELOPMENT IN PRIMARY RHEGMATOGENOUS RETINAL DETACHMENT: A Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Study With a New Postoperative Classification System.

Authors:  Luis Arias; Noel Padrón-Pérez; Ignacio Flores-Moreno; Lena Giralt; Estefanía Cobos; Daniel Lorenzo; Pere García-Bru; Bruno Dias; Josep M Caminal
Journal:  Retina       Date:  2020-07       Impact factor: 3.975

Review 5.  INVERTED INTERNAL LIMITING MEMBRANE FLAP TECHNIQUE FOR MACULAR HOLE COEXISTENT WITH RHEGMATOGENOUS RETINAL DETACHMENT.

Authors:  Theodor Stappler; Andrea Montesel; Lazaros Konstantinidis; Thomas J Wolfensberger; Chiara M Eandi
Journal:  Retina       Date:  2022-04-14       Impact factor: 3.975

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.