Comparison of conventional internal limiting membrane versus pars plana vitrectomy without peeling for small idiopathic macular hole.

IF 1.9 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Maria Ludovica Ruggeri, Alberto Quarta, Paola Marolo, Lucio Zeppa, Lorenzo Motta, Matteo Gironi, Lisa Toto, Michele Reibaldi, Rodolfo Mastropasqua
{"title":"Comparison of conventional internal limiting membrane versus pars plana vitrectomy without peeling for small idiopathic macular hole.","authors":"Maria Ludovica Ruggeri, Alberto Quarta, Paola Marolo, Lucio Zeppa, Lorenzo Motta, Matteo Gironi, Lisa Toto, Michele Reibaldi, Rodolfo Mastropasqua","doi":"10.1186/s40942-024-00599-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare functional and anatomical changes in patients with small full thickness macular holes (FTMHs) who underwent pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with or without Internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>42 eyes of 42 patients diagnosed for FTMHs (< 250 micron) were included in our prospective interventional study. Main outcome measures were: Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA), Macular hole closure rate, Ellipsoid Zone (EZ) and External Limiting Membrane (ELM) recover, Vessel Density in both Superficial (VDSCP) and deep (VDDCP) capillary plexus, Macular pigment Optical density (MPOD) and mean Central Macular Sensitivity (CMS).Patients were randomly divided into \"peeling group\" (21 patients), in which the ILM peeling maneuver was performed and \"no-peeling group\" (21 patients) in which the ILM was not peeled off. Examinations were repeated one month (T1), three months (T2) and six months (T3) after surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Although significant improvements in terms of MPOD, CMS, VDSCP and VDDCP over time (p < 0.001) no significant differences were found between the peeling and no peeling group. Conversely, FTMHs closure was achieved in all cases (100%) in the peeling group, whereas 10% of cases in the no peeling group experienced the hole re-opening at T3, with reported different rates of ELM/EZ recover between the two groups. Nevertheless, BCVA improved significantly (p < 0.001) but without significant differences between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>No significant differences were found in terms of anatomical and functional outcomes between the peeling or not the ILM in small FTMHs at 6 months follow-up.</p>","PeriodicalId":14289,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Retina and Vitreous","volume":"10 1","pages":"81"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11515618/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Retina and Vitreous","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40942-024-00599-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to compare functional and anatomical changes in patients with small full thickness macular holes (FTMHs) who underwent pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with or without Internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling.

Methods: 42 eyes of 42 patients diagnosed for FTMHs (< 250 micron) were included in our prospective interventional study. Main outcome measures were: Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA), Macular hole closure rate, Ellipsoid Zone (EZ) and External Limiting Membrane (ELM) recover, Vessel Density in both Superficial (VDSCP) and deep (VDDCP) capillary plexus, Macular pigment Optical density (MPOD) and mean Central Macular Sensitivity (CMS).Patients were randomly divided into "peeling group" (21 patients), in which the ILM peeling maneuver was performed and "no-peeling group" (21 patients) in which the ILM was not peeled off. Examinations were repeated one month (T1), three months (T2) and six months (T3) after surgery.

Results: Although significant improvements in terms of MPOD, CMS, VDSCP and VDDCP over time (p < 0.001) no significant differences were found between the peeling and no peeling group. Conversely, FTMHs closure was achieved in all cases (100%) in the peeling group, whereas 10% of cases in the no peeling group experienced the hole re-opening at T3, with reported different rates of ELM/EZ recover between the two groups. Nevertheless, BCVA improved significantly (p < 0.001) but without significant differences between the two groups.

Conclusions: No significant differences were found in terms of anatomical and functional outcomes between the peeling or not the ILM in small FTMHs at 6 months follow-up.

传统内限制膜与无剥离玻璃体旁切除术治疗特发性小黄斑孔的比较。
背景:本研究旨在比较接受或不接受内限制膜(ILM)剥离术(PPV)的小全厚黄斑孔(FTMHs)患者的功能和解剖变化:尽管随着时间的推移,MPOD、CMS、VDSCP 和 VDDCP 有了明显改善(p 结论:在 MPOD、CMS、VDSCP 和 VDDCP 方面没有发现明显差异:在随访 6 个月时,小 FTMHs 患者是否剥离 ILM 在解剖和功能结果方面没有发现明显差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
81
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Retina and Vitreous focuses on the ophthalmic subspecialty of vitreoretinal disorders. The journal presents original articles on new approaches to diagnosis, outcomes of clinical trials, innovations in pharmacological therapy and surgical techniques, as well as basic science advances that impact clinical practice. Topical areas include, but are not limited to: -Imaging of the retina, choroid and vitreous -Innovations in optical coherence tomography (OCT) -Small-gauge vitrectomy, retinal detachment, chromovitrectomy -Electroretinography (ERG), microperimetry, other functional tests -Intraocular tumors -Retinal pharmacotherapy & drug delivery -Diabetic retinopathy & other vascular diseases -Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) & other macular entities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信