Literature DB >> 30451206

Secondary paracentral retinal hole following internal limiting membrane peeling for a large macular hole.

Diva Kant Misra1, Ronel Soibam1, Awaneesh Upadhyay1, Pushkar Dhir1, Rammohan Paidi1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30451206      PMCID: PMC6256911          DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1001_18

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0301-4738            Impact factor:   1.848


× No keyword cloud information.
Main text: A 75-year-old female with a diagnosis of large (basal diameter 1,685 μm) Stage 3 macular hole [Fig. 1a and b] and coexisting epiretinal membrane (BCVA 6/60) underwent uneventful and atraumatic 25 G vitrectomy along with brilliant blue-assisted internal limiting membrane peeling. Postoperative evaluation after 1 month revealed a secondary paracentral retinal hole formation [Fig. 1c and d] along with reduction in the size of the macular hole (BCVA 6/36). Pars plana vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling is the standard technique for the management of large macular holes.[1] Surgeons performing macular hole should be aware of this relatively rare complication[234] while performing the procedure. Secondary holes closer to the fovea may require resurgery with gas tamponade.[5]
Figure 1

Preoperative colour fundus photograph (a) and optical coherence tomography (b) showing a large macular hole with coexisitng epiretinal membrane. Postoperative colour fundus photograph (c) and optical coherence tomography (d) revealed a secondary paracentral retinal hole with reduction in size of the macular hole

Preoperative colour fundus photograph (a) and optical coherence tomography (b) showing a large macular hole with coexisitng epiretinal membrane. Postoperative colour fundus photograph (c) and optical coherence tomography (d) revealed a secondary paracentral retinal hole with reduction in size of the macular hole

Declaration of patient consent

The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form the patient(s) has/have given his/her/their consent for his/her/their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patients understand that their names and initials will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal their identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.
  5 in total

1.  Secondary paracentral retinal holes following internal limiting membrane removal.

Authors:  P Steven; H Laqua; D Wong; H Hoerauf
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 4.638

2.  [Removal of the internal limiting membrane in macular holes. Clinical and morphological findings].

Authors:  C Eckardt; U Eckardt; S Groos; L Luciano; E Reale
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 1.059

3.  Eccentric Macular Hole after Pars Plana Vitrectomy for Idiopathic Macular Hole: A Case Report.

Authors:  Irini Chatziralli; George Theodossiadis; Maria Douvali; Alexandros A Rouvas; Panagiotis Theodossiadis
Journal:  Case Rep Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-02-20

4.  Eccentric Macular Hole after Pars Plana Vitrectomy for Epiretinal Membrane Without Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling: A Case Report.

Authors:  Christina Garnavou-Xirou; Tina Xirou; Stamatina Kabanarou; Ilias Gkizis; Stavros Velissaris; Irini Chatziralli
Journal:  Ophthalmol Ther       Date:  2017-10-17

5.  Multiple extrafoveal macular holes following internal limiting membrane peeling.

Authors:  Nazimul Hussain; Sandip Mitra
Journal:  Int Med Case Rep J       Date:  2018-05-01
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.