Literature DB >> 31860521

FOVEAL SPARING INTERNAL LIMITING MEMBRANE PEELING FOR IDIOPATHIC MACULAR HOLES: EFFECTS ON ANATOMICAL RESTORATION OF THE FOVEA AND VISUAL FUNCTION.

Declan C Murphy1,2, Will Fostier1, Jon Rees3, David H Steel1,4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Muller cells seem to be important in maintaining foveal morphology through connections between their foot processes and the internal limiting membrane (ILM). Internal limiting membrane peeling causes Muller cell trauma. We hypothesized that leaving a rim of unpeeled ILM around idiopathic macular holes undergoing vitrectomy surgery would improve postoperative foveal morphology and vision.
METHODS: Prospective pilot study of fovea-sparing ILM peeling in a consecutive cohort of patients with macular holes over a 12-month period. Spectral-domain optical coherence tomography and Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters best-corrected visual acuity were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively, and foveal morphology and metamorphopsia postoperatively. The foveal sparing group was compared with a second consecutive cohort who received standard ILM peeling (control group).
RESULTS: Thirty-four eyes of 34 patients were included in each group. Groups showed no significant preoperative differences. 34/34 holes were successfully closed with surgery in the foveal sparing group and 32/34 in the control group. The foveal sparing group showed better postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (67.7 vs. 63.8, P = 0.003) and best-corrected visual acuity improvement (25.1 vs. 20.2, P = 0.03). The foveal sparing group demonstrated thicker minimum foveal thickness (211 vs. 173 μm, P = 0.002) and less steep foveal depression (158 vs. 149, P = 0.002).
CONCLUSION: Preserving nonpeeled ILM around macular holes resulted in a high closure rate, improved foveal morphology, and better postoperative best-corrected visual acuity. An appropriately powered randomized controlled study is warranted.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 31860521     DOI: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000002724

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


  6 in total

1.  Comparison of long-term visual and anatomical outcomes between internal limiting membrane flap and peeling techniques for macular holes with a propensity score analysis.

Authors:  Jay Jiyong Kwak; Suk Ho Byeon
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2022-05-18       Impact factor: 3.775

Review 2.  Literature Review of Surgical Treatment in Idiopathic Full-Thickness Macular Hole.

Authors:  Mantapond Ittarat; Thanapong Somkijrungroj; Sunee Chansangpetch; Pear Pongsachareonnont
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-07-30

Review 3.  Macular Holes: Main Clinical Presentations, Diagnosis, and Therapies.

Authors:  Elias Premi; Simone Donati; Lorenzo Azzi; Giovanni Porta; Cristian Metrangolo; Liviana Fontanel; Francesco Morescalchi; Claudio Azzolini
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-04-11       Impact factor: 1.974

4.  FOVEA-SPARING VERSUS COMPLETE INTERNAL LIMITING MEMBRANE PEELING IN VITRECTOMY FOR VITREOMACULAR INTERFACE DISEASES: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Yuelin Wang; Xinyu Zhao; Wenfei Zhang; Jingyuan Yang; Youxin Chen
Journal:  Retina       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 4.256

5.  Foveal-Sparing ILM Peeling in a Case with Vitreomacular Traction and Foveal Detachment.

Authors:  Christoph Leisser; Oliver Findl
Journal:  Case Rep Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-04-12

Review 6.  Spotlight on the Internal Limiting Membrane Technique for Macular Holes: Current Perspectives.

Authors:  Tomaso Caporossi; Matteo Mario Carlà; Gloria Gambini; Umberto De Vico; Antonio Baldascino; Stanislao Rizzo
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-04-06
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.