Micol Alkabes1,2, Carlos Mateo3. 1. Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria "Maggiore della Carità", S.C.D.O. Oculistica, Corso Mazzini, 18, 28100, Novara, Italy. micol_alkabes@hotmail.com. 2. IMO - Instituto de Microcirugía Ocular, Barcelona, Spain. micol_alkabes@hotmail.com. 3. IMO - Instituto de Microcirugía Ocular, Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to review anatomical and functional outcomes following macular buckling (MB) in high myopia and to compare such results with those obtained by pars plana vitrectomy (PPV). METHODS: PubMed articles on MB in high myopia (2000-2016) were reviewed. Main outcomes included retinal reattachment and macular hole (MH) closure rates, resolution of myopic foveoschisis (MFS), and postoperative visual acuity. RESULTS: Thirty-one articles included 16 in patients with retinal detachment due to MH (MHRD group), 11 in MFS with or without foveal detachment (MFS group), and 4 in MH patients with MFS (MH-MFS group). Surgical techniques mainly differed in the type of buckle, rectus muscles involvement, and concurrent PPV. In eyes with persistent MH, prognosis in the MHRD and MH-MFS groups differed between eyes receiving MB compared to PPV: functional outcome was markedly poorer and there was a higher risk of retinal redetachment associated with PPV. In the MSF group, secondary MHs were more likely to develop in eyes treated with PPV and internal limiting membrane peeling than those undergoing MB alone or combined with PPV. Retinal pigment epithelium changes, malpositioning, perforation, and choroidal detachment were the main complications. CONCLUSIONS: Although different approaches are used, complete resolution of foveoschisis, retinal reattachment, and MH closure seem to be achieved more frequently with MB than PPV.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to review anatomical and functional outcomes following macular buckling (MB) in high myopia and to compare such results with those obtained by pars plana vitrectomy (PPV). METHODS: PubMed articles on MB in high myopia (2000-2016) were reviewed. Main outcomes included retinal reattachment and macular hole (MH) closure rates, resolution of myopic foveoschisis (MFS), and postoperative visual acuity. RESULTS: Thirty-one articles included 16 in patients with retinal detachment due to MH (MHRD group), 11 in MFS with or without foveal detachment (MFS group), and 4 in MH patients with MFS (MH-MFS group). Surgical techniques mainly differed in the type of buckle, rectus muscles involvement, and concurrent PPV. In eyes with persistent MH, prognosis in the MHRD and MH-MFS groups differed between eyes receiving MB compared to PPV: functional outcome was markedly poorer and there was a higher risk of retinal redetachment associated with PPV. In the MSF group, secondary MHs were more likely to develop in eyes treated with PPV and internal limiting membrane peeling than those undergoing MB alone or combined with PPV. Retinal pigment epithelium changes, malpositioning, perforation, and choroidal detachment were the main complications. CONCLUSIONS: Although different approaches are used, complete resolution of foveoschisis, retinal reattachment, and MH closure seem to be achieved more frequently with MB than PPV.