Literature DB >> 8927804

Reoperation after failed macular hole surgery.

W E Smiddy1, R N Sjaarda, B M Glaser, H W Flynn, J T Thompson, A Hanham, R P Murphy.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The authors determined the anatomic and visual success rates of vitrectomy in patients who have failed previous macular hole surgery.
METHODS: Standardized Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS)-style best-corrected visual acuity was measured in each patient pre- and postoperatively. Surgery was performed at two centers using a standardized protocol, as previously reported, using 1330 ng bovine-derived transforming growth factor-beta 2 (TGF-beta 2) and 16% perfluoropropane internal gas tamponade. Endpoint analyses were conducted for anatomic closure of the hole, visual improvement of three or more ETDRS lines, and final visual acuity of > or = 20/63 and > or = 20/40.
RESULTS: Forty-eight failing macular hole surgery were reoperated. The anatomic results showed closure of the hole in 40 (83%) cases at the end of the mean follow-up interval of 7.4 months. The visual acuity improved in greater than or equal to three lines in 52%, was > or = 20/63 in 54%, and was > or = 20/40 in 25% of reoperated eyes. The only factor associated with a better final visual acuity was preoperative visual acuity better than 20/80. Nuclear sclerosis leading to cataract extraction was observed in 13 (30%) of 43 initially phakic eyes.
CONCLUSIONS: Macular hole closure was induced in this subset of reoperated patients. Visual improvement occurred often, although in a lower percentage than has been reported for primary surgical eyes. Repeat vitrectomy should be considered in patients with persistent macular hole after failure of primary surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8927804     DOI: 10.1097/00006982-199616010-00004

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


  9 in total

1.  Visual and anatomical results of surgery for long standing macular holes.

Authors:  R A Scott; E Ezra; J F West; Z J Gregor
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 4.638

Review 2.  Fourth time lucky: a case of multiple recurrence of a macular hole.

Authors:  H M Hussin; R H Y Asaria; N E Knox Cartwright; R H B Grey
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 4.638

3.  Predictive values in macular hole repair.

Authors:  Hans Hoerauf
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 4.638

4.  Heavy silicone oil (Densiron-68) for the treatment of persistent macular holes: Densiron-68 endotamponade for persistent macular holes.

Authors:  Stanislao Rizzo; Federica Genovesi-Ebert; Andrea Vento; Federica Cresti; Sofia Miniaci; Maria Chiara Romagnoli
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-08-01       Impact factor: 3.117

5.  Surgical management of macular holes: results using gas tamponade alone, or in combination with autologous platelet concentrate, or transforming growth factor beta 2.

Authors:  M Minihan; M Goggin; P E Cleary
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 4.638

6.  The role of patient age and intraocular gases in cataract progression following vitrectomy for macular holes and epiretinal membranes.

Authors:  John T Thompson
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  2003

Review 7.  Comparison of face-down posturing with nonsupine posturing after macular hole surgery: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Song Xia; Xin-Yu Zhao; Er-Qian Wang; You-Xin Chen
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-01-28       Impact factor: 2.209

8.  Management of Stage IV Macular Holes: When Standard Surgery Fails.

Authors:  R Reis; N Ferreira; A Meireles
Journal:  Case Rep Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-08-08

9.  Outcomes of Light Silicone Oil Tamponade for Failed Idiopathic Macular Hole Surgery.

Authors:  M Hossein Nowroozzadeh; Hossein Ashraf; Mehdi Zadmehr; Mohsen Farvardin
Journal:  J Ophthalmic Vis Res       Date:  2018 Apr-Jun
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.