Literature DB >> 33596577

Inverted Internal Limiting Membrane Flap Technique versus Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling for Large Macular Holes: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Ji-Guo Yu1, Jing Wang1, Yi Xiang1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling is an effective surgical procedure for the treatment of macular holes (MHs). However, there is a possibility of poor postoperative anatomical closure with conventional ILM peeling for MHs larger than 400 μm. Therefore, a novel inverted ILM flap technique was developed for such cases.
OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis study was performed to evaluate and compare the anatomical and visual outcomes of the inverted ILM flap technique and ILM peeling in large MHs.
METHODS: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The trial eligibility and risk of bias were assessed according to Cochrane review methods. The primary outcome measures included MH closure rate and postoperative visual acuity (VA). Subgroup analysis of postoperative VA based on follow-up time was also conducted. Pooled odds ratios (ORs), weighted mean difference (WMD), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software.
RESULTS: Five RCTs with a total of 155 eyes in the inverted ILM flap group and 161 eyes in the ILM peeling group were included in this meta-analysis. Statistical meta-analysis revealed that the overall MH closure rate in the inverted ILM flap group was significantly higher than that in the ILM peeling group (OR = 3.10; 95% CI: 1.25-7.66; p = 0.01). The postoperative VA was significantly better in the inverted ILM flap group than the ILM peeling group (WMD = -0.14; 95% CI: -0.21 to -0.07; p = 0.0002). The subgroup meta-analysis indicated that the postoperative VA was significantly better in the inverted ILM flap group than the ILM peeling group (WMD = -0.17; 95% CI: -0.26 to -0.08; p = 0.0004) at the 3-month follow-up. However, no significant difference was observed between the 2 groups at the 6-month follow-up (WMD = -0.09; 95% CI: -0.20 to 0.02; p = 0.10).
CONCLUSIONS: Vitrectomy with the inverted ILM flap technique showed a higher anatomical closure rate as well as visual gain - although only in the short term as no difference in visual recovery was found at the 6-month follow-up - than did ILM peeling in large MHs. The inverted ILM flap technique should be considered as a preferred and routine procedure for the treatment of patients with MHs larger than 400 µm.
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Internal limiting membrane peeling; Inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique; Large macular hole; Meta-analysis

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33596577      PMCID: PMC8619774          DOI: 10.1159/000515283

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmic Res        ISSN: 0030-3747            Impact factor:   2.892


  36 in total

1.  Macular hole size as a prognostic factor in macular hole surgery.

Authors:  S Ullrich; C Haritoglou; C Gass; M Schaumberger; M W Ulbig; A Kampik
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 4.638

Review 2.  Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.

Authors:  Julian P T Higgins; Simon G Thompson; Jonathan J Deeks; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-09-06

Review 3.  Pathogenesis of macular holes and therapeutic implications.

Authors:  William E Smiddy; Harry W Flynn
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 5.258

4.  Intrasurgical dynamics of macular hole surgery: an assessment of surgery-induced ultrastructural alterations with intraoperative optical coherence tomography.

Authors:  Justis P Ehlers; David Xu; Peter K Kaiser; Rishi P Singh; Sunil K Srivastava
Journal:  Retina       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.256

Review 5.  Best surgical technique and outcomes for large macular holes: retrospective multicentre study in Japan.

Authors:  Toshifumi Yamashita; Taiji Sakamoto; Hiroto Terasaki; Masanori Iwasaki; Yoko Ogushi; Fumiki Okamoto; Masaru Takeuchi; Tsutomu Yasukawa; Yoshihiro Takamura; Nahoko Ogata; Yumiko Nakamura
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-04-19       Impact factor: 3.761

6.  Comparative Evaluation of Standard ILM Peel With Inverted ILM Flap Technique In Large Macular Holes: A Prospective, Randomized Study.

Authors:  S Manasa; Prateek Kakkar; Atul Kumar; Parijat Chandra; Vinod Kumar; Raghav Ravani
Journal:  Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina       Date:  2018-04-01       Impact factor: 1.300

7.  Macular hole surgery with internal-limiting membrane peeling and intravitreous air.

Authors:  D W Park; J O Sipperley; S R Sneed; P U Dugel; J Jacobsen
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 12.079

8.  Vitreous surgery for idiopathic macular holes. Results of a pilot study.

Authors:  N E Kelly; R T Wendel
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  1991-05

9.  The Role of Inverted Internal Limiting Membrane Flap in Macular Hole Closure.

Authors:  Yusuke Shiode; Yuki Morizane; Ryo Matoba; Masayuki Hirano; Shinichiro Doi; Shinji Toshima; Kosuke Takahashi; Ryoichi Araki; Yuki Kanzaki; Mika Hosogi; Tomoko Yonezawa; Atsushi Yoshida; Fumio Shiraga
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 4.799

10.  Comparative efficacy evaluation of inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique and internal limiting membrane peeling in large macular holes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yu Shen; Xiaoqin Lin; Luyi Zhang; Miaoqin Wu
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-01-08       Impact factor: 2.209

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.