Wen-Jian Xin1, Ji-Ze Jiang1, Lei-Bing Ji1, Wen-Juan Lv1, Yong-Xin Gu1, Yun Xiao2. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Military Ophthalmological Center, General Hospital of Xinjiang Military Region, No. 754 Beijing Middle Road, Urumqi, 830054, Xinjiang, China. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, Military Ophthalmological Center, General Hospital of Xinjiang Military Region, No. 754 Beijing Middle Road, Urumqi, 830054, Xinjiang, China. yunxiao2688@126.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To explore whether the efficacy of fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling (FS-ILMP) is better than that of complete internal limiting membrane peeling (ILMP). METHODS: This retrospective clinical study included 34 cases (34 eyes) with myopic traction maculopathy collected from June 2017 to February 2019. Twenty-three-gauge (23-G) pars plana vitrectomy (23G PPV) was performed on all patients. In the FS-ILMP group, 18 eyes retained the internal limiting membrane (ILM) of about 1 to 1.5 papillary diameter centered on fovea centralis, while in the standard ILMP group, the ILM was completely removed from 16 eyes. The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central foveal thickness (CFT), and other indexes were collected before and 6 months after surgery. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in baseline clinical characteristics between the two groups. CFT and BCVA were significantly improved in both FS-ILMP and standard ILMP group, but the postoperative BCVA of the FS-ILMP group was significantly better than that of the standard ILMP group (P < 0.001). Two cases of subretinal effusion in macula were recorded in the FS-ILMP group, and three eyes in the standard ILMP group developed macular holes after surgery. Although both treatments relieved the mechanical traction of macular fovea, the patients in the FS-ILMP group showed better clinical outcomes in various aspects. CONCLUSION: These results improved our understanding of the clinical application of vitrectomy combined with preservation of ILM upon the fovea centralis, which might lay a foundation for in-depth study on the treatment of myopic traction maculopathy.
PURPOSE: To explore whether the efficacy of fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling (FS-ILMP) is better than that of complete internal limiting membrane peeling (ILMP). METHODS: This retrospective clinical study included 34 cases (34 eyes) with myopic traction maculopathy collected from June 2017 to February 2019. Twenty-three-gauge (23-G) pars plana vitrectomy (23G PPV) was performed on all patients. In the FS-ILMP group, 18 eyes retained the internal limiting membrane (ILM) of about 1 to 1.5 papillary diameter centered on fovea centralis, while in the standard ILMP group, the ILM was completely removed from 16 eyes. The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central foveal thickness (CFT), and other indexes were collected before and 6 months after surgery. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in baseline clinical characteristics between the two groups. CFT and BCVA were significantly improved in both FS-ILMP and standard ILMP group, but the postoperative BCVA of the FS-ILMP group was significantly better than that of the standard ILMP group (P < 0.001). Two cases of subretinal effusion in macula were recorded in the FS-ILMP group, and three eyes in the standard ILMP group developed macular holes after surgery. Although both treatments relieved the mechanical traction of macular fovea, the patients in the FS-ILMP group showed better clinical outcomes in various aspects. CONCLUSION: These results improved our understanding of the clinical application of vitrectomy combined with preservation of ILM upon the fovea centralis, which might lay a foundation for in-depth study on the treatment of myopic traction maculopathy.
Authors: Jorge Ruiz-Medrano; Javier A Montero; Ignacio Flores-Moreno; Luis Arias; Alfredo García-Layana; José M Ruiz-Moreno Journal: Prog Retin Eye Res Date: 2018-11-01 Impact factor: 21.198