| Literature DB >> 31641530 |
Giancarlo Sborgia1, Alfredo Niro2, Alessandra Sborgia1,2, Valeria Albano1, Tiziana Tritto1, Luigi Sborgia1, Valentina Pastore1, Rossella Donghia3, Ermete Giancipoli4, Nicola Recchimurzo1, Francesco Boscia4, Giovanni Alessio1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Inverted Internal Limiting Membrane (ILM)-flap technique would seem to lead to higher closure rate and better visual acuity than traditional procedure with ILM peeling for the treatment of large macular hole (LMH). Visual acuity recovery does not reveal many other functional changes related to surgical approach. Our purpose was to evaluate macular function and morphology over a 1-year follow-up after inverted ILM-flap technique for LMH by using microperimetry in order to predict visual prognosis.Entities:
Keywords: Fixation behaviour; Inverted ILM-flap; Large macular hole; Microperimetry; Retinal sensitivity
Year: 2019 PMID: 31641530 PMCID: PMC6798391 DOI: 10.1186/s40942-019-0195-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Retina Vitreous ISSN: 2056-9920
Baseline characteristics of patients (n = 22) and eyes (n = 23) underwent surgery
| Age, years | |
| Mean (± SD) | 65.6 ± 5.7 |
| Range | 51–72 |
| Male: female | 12:10 |
| Axial length, mm | |
| Mean (± SD) | 23.32 ± 1.05 |
| Range | 21.12–24.60 |
| Lens status (phakic/pseudophakic) | 9:14 |
| MH size, µm | |
| Mean (± SD) | 511 ± 129 |
| Range | 402–1000 |
| IOP (mmHg) | 14 ± 8 |
| Baseline mean BCVA, Logmar | |
| Mean (± SD) | 1.06 ± 0.34 |
| Range | 2.0–0.2 |
| MS, dB | |
| Mean (± SD) | 11.30 ± 4.17 |
| Range | 0.6–15.8 |
| CMS, dB | |
| Mean (± SD) | 6.85 ± 3.87 |
| Range | 0–12.8 |
BCEA, degree2 Mean (± SD) | |
| At 68% | 5.10 ± 3.58 |
| At 95% | 12.66 ± 8.60 |
| At 99% | 22.68 ± 16.04 |
SD standard deviation, MH macular hole, IOP intraocular pressure, BCVA best corrected visual acuity, logMAR logarithm of minimum angle of resolution, MS macular sensitivity, dB decibel, CMS central macular sensitivity, BCEA biavariate contour ellipse area
Fig. 1Visual acuity changes over follow-up. Visual acuity (Logmar) significantly improved after Internal Limiting Membrane (ILM)-flap inversion. Major visual acuity improvement was achieved at 1 and 3 months after surgery with a mild gain at 6 and 12 months
Fig. 2Retinal sensitivity changes over follow-up. Mean Macular Sensitivity (MS, decibels), meaning the mean of sensitivity of all 45 loci in the central 12°, significantly improved only at 6 and 12 months from surgery
Fig. 3Central Macular Sensitivity changes over follow-up. Mean Central Macular Sensitivity (CMS, decibels), meaning the mean sensitivity of the central 13 loci (enclosed by a circle with a 4° diameter), improved incrementally from the first follow-up after surgery
Changes of fixation quantitative parameter as Bivariate Contour Ellipse Area (BCEA, degree2) which contains 68%, 95% and 99% of fixation points
| Baseline | 1 month | 3 months | 6 months | 12 months | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BCEA 68%, degree2 | 5.10 ± 3.58 | 3.37 ± 2.32 | 3.22 ± 2.74 | 3.40 ± 2.94 | 3.20 ± 2.97 |
| BCEA 95%, degree2 | 12.66 ± 8.60 | 8.47 ± 5.36 | 8.28 ± 6.64 | 8.41 ± 6.04 | 7.68 ± 5.68 |
| BCEA 99%, degree2 | 22.68 ± 16.04 | 14.83 ± 9.00 | 14.36 ± 11.58 | 14.73 ± 11.13 | 13.04 ± 9.76 |
Fig. 4Fixation stability changes. The Bivariate Contour Ellipse Area (BCEA) values have been applied to obtain a quantitative measure of fixation stability. We analysed BCEA which contains 68%, 95% and 99% of fixation points. BCEA significantly decreased at all follow-up
Linear regression model of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 12 months on single variables (A); multiple linear regression model on all variables together in the model (B); final multiple linear regression model in backward with stepwise method (C)
| Parametersa | β | se(β) | p-value | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (A) | ||||
| Sex (female/male) | − 0.32 | 0.18 | 0.09 | − 0.70 to 0.05 |
| Lens Status (phakic/pseuphakic) | 0.35 | 0.18 | 0.07 | − 0.03 to 0.72 |
| Age | 0.002 | 0.017 | 0.881 | − 0.033 to 0.038 |
| AL (mm) | 0.06 | 0.09 | 0.52 | − 0.13 to 0.25 |
| MH size | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.087 | − 0.0002 to 0.0027 |
| BCVA pre (Logmar) | 0.72 | 0.24 | 0.01 | 0.23 to 1.22 |
| MS pre (dB) | − 0.067 | 0.017 | 0.001 | − 0.102 to − 0.032 |
| CMS pre (dB) | − 0.06 | 0.02 | 0.01 | − 0.10 to − 0.01 |
| BCEA 68% pre | 0.081 | 0.021 | 0.001 | 0.037 to 0.124 |
| BCEA 95% pre | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 to 0.05 |
| BCEA 99% pre | 0.014 | 0.005 | 0.016 | 0.003 to 0.025 |
| (B) | ||||
| Sex (female/male) | 0.07 | 0.16 | 0.67 | − 0.28 to 0.42 |
| LensStatus (Phakic/pseudophakic) | 0.05 | 0.15 | 0.73 | − 0.27 to 0.38 |
| Age | 0.004 | 0.011 | 0.69 | − 0.019 to 0.003 |
| AL (mm) | − 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.43 | − 0.22 to 0.08 |
| MH size | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.038 | 0.0001 to 000044 |
| BCVA pre (Logmar) | 0.26 | 0.27 | 0.35 | 0.335 to 0.862 |
| MS pre (dB) | − 0.085 | 0.231 | 0.004 | − 0.136 to 0.034 |
| CMS pre (dB) | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.12 | − 0.01 to 0.11 |
| BCEA 68% pre | 0.07 | 0.03 | 0.07 | − 0.01 to 0.14 |
| BCEA 95% pre | − 0.12 | 0.04 | 0.02 | − 0.22 to 0.02 |
| BCEA 99% pre | 0.06 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.01 to 0.11 |
| (C) | ||||
| MH size | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.029 | 0.0002 to 0.0036 |
| MS pre (dB) | − 0.056 | 0.013 | 0.001 | − 0.084 to − 0.028 |
| BCEA 68% pre | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.10 | 0.01 to 0.11 |
| BCEA 95% pre | − 0.11 | 0.04 | 0.01 | − 0.20 to − 0.03 |
| BCEA 99% pre | 0.06 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.02 to 0.11 |
β coefficient, se(β) standard error of coefficient, AL axial length, MH macular hole, BCVA pre best corrected visual acuity preoperative, Logmar logarithm of minimum angle of resolution, MS pre retinal sensitivity preoperative, dB decibel, CMS pre central macular sensitivity preoperative, BCEA 68%, 95%, 99% bivariate contour ellipse area at 68%, 95%, and 99% of fixation points, respectively
aAll variables included in the model were considered as continuous
Fig. 5Representative case of inverted Internal Limiting Membrane (ILM)-flap technique for large macular hole (LMH). Morphologic and functional changes over follow-up. OCT scans show the resolution of macular hole over follow-up (left column). Preoperative minimum macular hole diameter was 464 µm (left column, top panel). One month after surgery, the LMH was closed and the inverted ILM-flap could be seen covering the hole with a hyperreflective tissue inside the hole (left column, second row panel). Six months postoperatively, outer retinal layers were partially restored (left column, third row panel). Twelve months postoperatively, outer retinal layers were not completely restored (left column, bottom panel). Related microperimetric maps with Bivariate Contour Ellipse Area (BCEA) analysis over follow-up (right column). At baseline, microperimetry revealed an absolute scotoma (red/orange points with low sensitivity values) with a surrounding relative scotoma (yellow points) in the central degrees; BCEA (concentric ellipses) was large in diameter (right column, top panel). One month after surgery, both absolute and relative scotoma progressively reduced with a mild increase of whole sensitivity; BCEA showed a reduction in dimension (right column, second row panel). Six months postoperatively, all retinal sensitivity increased mainly on central degrees; BCEA had a mild increase in dimension (right column, third row panel). At last follow-up, we observed a mild reduction in central retinal sensitivity with a reduction of BCEA (right column, bottom panel)