Literature DB >> 32231259

Factors affecting anatomical and visual outcome after macular hole surgery: findings from a large prospective UK cohort.

D H Steel1,2, P H J Donachie3, G W Aylward4, D A Laidlaw5, T H Williamson5, D Yorston6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To reassess the definition of a large macular hole, factors predicting hole closure and post-surgery visual recovery.
DESIGN: Database study of 1483 primary macular hole operations. Eligible operations were primary MH operations treated with a vitrectomy and a gas or air tamponade. Excluded were eyes with a history of retinal detachment, high myopia, previous vitrectomy or trauma.
RESULTS: A higher proportion of operations were performed in eyes from females (71.1%) who were 'on average' younger (p < 0.001), with slightly larger holes (p < 0.001) than male patients. Sulfur hexafluoride gas was generally used for smaller holes (p < 0.001). From 1253 operations with a known surgical outcome, successful hole closure was achieved in 1199 (96%) and influenced by smaller holes and complete ILM peeling (p < 0.001), but not post-surgery positioning (p = 0.072). A minimum linear diameter of ~500 μm marked the threshold where the success rate started to decline. From the 1056 successfully closed operations eligible for visual outcome analysis, visual success (defined as visual acuity of 0.30 or better logMAR) was achieved in 488 (46.2%) eyes. At the multivariate level, the factors predicting visual success were better pre-operative VA, smaller hole size, shorter duration of symptoms and the absence of AMD.
CONCLUSIONS: Females undergoing primary macular hole surgery tend to be younger and have larger holes than male patients. The definition of a large hole should be changed to around 500 μm, and patients should be operated on early to help achieve a good post-operative VA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32231259      PMCID: PMC7852599          DOI: 10.1038/s41433-020-0844-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eye (Lond)        ISSN: 0950-222X            Impact factor:   3.775


  3 in total

1.  Characteristics of the capillary-free zone in the normal human macula.

Authors:  L Z Wu; Z S Huang; D Z Wu; E Chan
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 2.447

2.  [Analysis of prognostic factors of anatomical and functional results of idiopathic macular hole surgery].

Authors:  R Kanovský; T Jurecka; E Gelnarová
Journal:  Cesk Slov Oftalmol       Date:  2009-05

Review 3.  Optimal management of idiopathic macular holes.

Authors:  Haifa A Madi; Ibrahim Masri; David H Steel
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-01-13
  3 in total
  14 in total

Review 1.  Surgical interventions for lamellar macular holes.

Authors:  Declan C Murphy; Jon Rees; David Hw Steel
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-11-08

2.  The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Lockdown on Macular Hole Surgery Provision and Surgical Outcomes: A Single-Centre Experience.

Authors:  Georgios D Panos; Olyvia Poyser; Humera Sarwar; Dharmalingam Kumudhan; Gavin Orr; Anwar Zaman; Craig Wilde
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-06-26       Impact factor: 4.964

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.  Response to 'Comment on: Factors affecting anatomical and visual outcome after macular hole surgery: findings from a large prospective UK cohort'.

Authors:  D H Steel; P H J Donachie; D A Laidlaw; T H Williamson; D Yorston
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2020-06-22       Impact factor: 4.456

5.  Predicting Postoperative Vision for Macular Hole with Automated Image Analysis.

Authors:  Declan C Murphy; Amar V Nasrulloh; Clare Lendrem; Sara Graziado; Mark Alberti; Morten la Cour; Boguslaw Obara; David H W Steel
Journal:  Ophthalmol Retina       Date:  2020-06-18

6.  ILM peeling with ILM flap transposition vs. classic ILM peeling for small and medium macula holes-a prospective randomized trial.

Authors:  Christoph Leisser; Manuel Ruiss; Caroline Pilwachs; Oliver Findl
Journal:  Spektrum Augenheilkd       Date:  2022-02-23

7.  Predicting Visual Improvement After Macular Hole Surgery: A Combined Model Using Deep Learning and Clinical Features.

Authors:  Alexandre Lachance; Mathieu Godbout; Fares Antaki; Mélanie Hébert; Serge Bourgault; Mathieu Caissie; Éric Tourville; Audrey Durand; Ali Dirani
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 3.048

8.  Internal limiting membrane peeling for large macular hole: Tailoring the rhexis to the shape of the hole.

Authors:  Dhananjay Shukla; Jay Kalliath
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 1.848

Review 9.  Refractory full thickness macular hole: current surgical management.

Authors:  Rino Frisina; Irene Gius; Luigi Tozzi; Edoardo Midena
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2021-01-21       Impact factor: 4.456

10.  Defining a Cutoff for Progression of Macular Holes.

Authors:  Carmen Baumann; Saskia Hoffmann; Ahmed Almarzooqi; Navid Johannigmann-Malek; Chris P Lohmann; Stephen B Kaye
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 3.283

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.