| Literature DB >> 32652958 |
Jiwei Tao1, Huan Chen1, Lin Zhu1, Deming Pan1, Jia Fang1, Yiqi Chen1, Jianbo Mao1, Lijun Shen2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To investigate the ability of intraoperative optical coherence tomography (iOCT) during macular hole (MH) surgery to image different hole edge configurations and predict the restoration of retinal microstructure and visual outcomes.Entities:
Keywords: Internal limiting membrane peeling; Intraoperative optical coherence tomography; Macular hole; Retina microstructure; Visual outcomes
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32652958 PMCID: PMC7353697 DOI: 10.1186/s12886-020-01541-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Ophthalmol ISSN: 1471-2415 Impact factor: 2.209
Fig. 1Case 1: A representative hole-door case. a The preoperative SD-OCT image showed a MH without a foveal flap in a 60-year-old woman. b iOCT showed vertical pillars of tissue at the edges of the hole projecting into the vitreous cavity (arrow) after ILM peeling. c Postoperatively at 6 months, SD-OCT showed hole closure with full recovery of the ELM and EZ. The BCVA was 0.4
Fig. 2Case 2: A representative foveal flap case. a The MH foveal flap was evident in the preoperative SD-OCT images (arrow) of a 63-year-old woman. b iOCT showed that the foveal flap (arrow) was preserved after ILM peeling. c Postoperatively at 6 months, SD-OCT showed hole closure with recovery of the ELM and EZ. The BCVA was 0.6
Fig. 3Case 3: A representative negative case. a The preoperative SD-OCT image showed a MH without a foveal flap in a 67-year-old woman. b iOCT showed neither foveal flap nor vertical pillars of tissue at the edges of the hole after ILM peeling. c Postoperatively at 6 months, SD-OCT showed hole closure without restoration of the ONL. The bridging tissue was hyperreflective. The BCVA was 0.15
Characteristics of the negative, hole-door, and foveal flap MH groups
| Groups | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hole-Door ( | Foveal Flap ( | Negative ( | P* | |
| Male/female, no | 5/19 | 7/8 | 5/9 | 0.252 |
| Age, (years) | 62.3 ± 15.5 | 63.0 ± 7.3 | 68.1 ± 5.9 | 0.151 |
| Axial length, (mm) | 23.53 ± 0.94 | 23.33 ± 1.27 | 23.36 ± 0.77 | 0.615 |
| Duration of MH, (months) | 2.87 ± 1.51 | 3.00 ± 1.71 | 3.07 ± 1.92 | 0.735 |
| Preoperative BCVA | 1.34 ± 1.17 | 0.89 ± 0.44 | 1.06 ± 0.56 | 0.287 |
| Preoperative MHD | 391.47 ± 165.32 | 380.07 ± 166.61 | 463.35 ± 174.04 | 0.268 |
| Macular hole closure | 15 (100%) | 14 (100%) | 23 (95.8%) | 0.717 |
| ELM restoration | 14 (93.3%) | 13 (92.9%) | 14 (58.3%) | 0.012 |
| EZ restoration | 5 (33.3%) | 7 (50%) | 8 (33.3%) | 0.587 |
| Postoperative BCVA | 0.24 ± 0.15 | 0.25 ± 0.15 | 0.68 ± 0.60 | 0.002 |
MH Macular hole, BCVA Best corrected visual acuity, MHD Minimum hole diameter, ELM External limiting membrane, EZ Ellipsoid zone; *, for age, axial length, duration of MH, preoperative BCVA, preoperative MHD, and postoperative BCVA, P-values were determined by ANOVA. For male/female ratio, MH closure, ELM restoration, and EZ restoration, P-values were determined by Chi-squared test
Functional and anatomical outcomes in the MHD ≤400 mm group
| Groups | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hole-Door ( | Foveal Flap ( | Negative ( | P | |
| Preoperative BCVA | 1.71 ± 1.53 | 0.90 ± 0.57 | 0.77 ± 0.28 | 0.11 |
| Preoperative MHD, μm | 285.75 ± 110.94 | 252.63 ± 72.19 | 289.56 ± 69.41 | 0.636 |
| Macular hole closure | 8 (100%) | 8 (100%) | 9 (100%) | / |
| ELM restoration | 8 (100%) | 8 (100%) | 9 (100%) | / |
| EZ restoration | 5 (62.5%) | 4 (50%) | 7 (77.8%) | 0.516 |
| Postoperative BCVA | 0.16 ± 0.14 | 0.23 ± 0.18 | 0.30 ± 0.12 | 0.179 |
MHD Minimum hole diameter, ELM External limiting membrane, EZ Ellipsoid zone, BCVA Best corrected visual acuity; *, for preoperative BCVA, preoperative MHD, and postoperative BCVA, P-values were determined by ANOVA. For EZ restoration, P-value determined by Chi-squared test
Functional and anatomical outcomes in the MHD > 400 mm group
| Groups | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hole-Door ( | Foveal Flap ( | Negative ( | P | |
| Preoperative BCVA | 0.92 ± 0.26 | 0.89 ± 0.21 | 1.24 ± 0.62 | 0.205 |
| Preoperative MHD, mm | 512.29 ± 132.22 | 550.00 ± 65.11 | 575.07 ± 118.08 | 0.496 |
| Macular hole closure | 7 (100%) | 6 (100%) | 14 (93.3%) | 0.75 |
| ELM restoration | 6 (85.7%) | 6 (100%) | 5 (33.3%) | 0.005 |
| EZ restoration | 2 (28.6%) | 2 (33.3%) | 2 (13.3%) | 0.569 |
| Postoperative BCVA | 0.34 ± 0.17 | 0.28 ± 0.10 | 0.93 ± 0.65 | 0.013 |
MHD Minimum hole diameter, ELM External limiting membrane, EZ Ellipsoid zone, BCVA Best corrected visual acuity; *, For preoperative BCVA, preoperative MHD, and postoperative BCVA, P-values were determined by ANOVA. For MH closure, ELM restoration, and EZ restoration, P-value determined by Chi-squared test