Comparing the inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique with internal limiting membrane insertion technique for treatment of large macular holes.

IF 2.3 2区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Miao Zeng, Chunyan Cai, Xiao Chen
{"title":"Comparing the inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique with internal limiting membrane insertion technique for treatment of large macular holes.","authors":"Miao Zeng, Chunyan Cai, Xiao Chen","doi":"10.1097/IAE.0000000000004443","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the anatomical and functional outcomes of the inverted internal limiting membrane(ILM) flap technique and ILM insertion technique for the treatment of large macular holes(MHs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seventy-four consecutive eyes with large MHs(minimum diameter ≥400 µm) were included. All patients underwent 25-gauge pars plana vitrectomy(PPV) with either inverted ILM flap technique(n=40) or ILM insertion technique(n=34). Swept source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) was performed before surgery and 12 months postoperatively. The rate of MH closure, postoperative best corrected visual acuity(BCVA) and SS-OCT findings were evaluated at 12 months after surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>MH closure was achieved in 34 eyes(85%) of the inverted ILM flap group and in 30 eyes(88.2%) of the ILM insertion group.There was no significant difference in the rate of MH closure(P=0.685). The mean BCVA improved from 1.30±0.81 logMAR (Snellen: 20/400) at baseline to 0.64±0.67 logMAR (Snellen: 20/87) at 12 months in the inverted ILM flap group, which was significanlty better than that in the insertion ILM group(P=0.047). At 12 months, the mean external limiting membrane (ELM) defect sizes was 106.68±196.25 µm in the inverted ILM flap group and 234.12±296.06 µm in the ILM insertion group, whereas the mean ellipsoid zone (EZ) defect sizes were 167.08±223.08 µm and 261.58±290.92 µm, respectively. The mean ELM defect sizes were significantly smaller in the inverted ILM flap group than in the ILM insertion group(p=0.039). However, there was no significant difference in mean EZ defect sizes between the two groups(P=0.160).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both the inverted ILM flap and the insertion ILM techniques were associated with high rates of MH closure in large MHs. The inverted ILM flap technique seemed to be more effective surgery for large MHs compared with the ILM insertion techniques in improving visual outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":54486,"journal":{"name":"Retina-The Journal of Retinal and Vitreous Diseases","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Retina-The Journal of Retinal and Vitreous Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/IAE.0000000000004443","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the anatomical and functional outcomes of the inverted internal limiting membrane(ILM) flap technique and ILM insertion technique for the treatment of large macular holes(MHs).

Methods: Seventy-four consecutive eyes with large MHs(minimum diameter ≥400 µm) were included. All patients underwent 25-gauge pars plana vitrectomy(PPV) with either inverted ILM flap technique(n=40) or ILM insertion technique(n=34). Swept source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) was performed before surgery and 12 months postoperatively. The rate of MH closure, postoperative best corrected visual acuity(BCVA) and SS-OCT findings were evaluated at 12 months after surgery.

Results: MH closure was achieved in 34 eyes(85%) of the inverted ILM flap group and in 30 eyes(88.2%) of the ILM insertion group.There was no significant difference in the rate of MH closure(P=0.685). The mean BCVA improved from 1.30±0.81 logMAR (Snellen: 20/400) at baseline to 0.64±0.67 logMAR (Snellen: 20/87) at 12 months in the inverted ILM flap group, which was significanlty better than that in the insertion ILM group(P=0.047). At 12 months, the mean external limiting membrane (ELM) defect sizes was 106.68±196.25 µm in the inverted ILM flap group and 234.12±296.06 µm in the ILM insertion group, whereas the mean ellipsoid zone (EZ) defect sizes were 167.08±223.08 µm and 261.58±290.92 µm, respectively. The mean ELM defect sizes were significantly smaller in the inverted ILM flap group than in the ILM insertion group(p=0.039). However, there was no significant difference in mean EZ defect sizes between the two groups(P=0.160).

Conclusion: Both the inverted ILM flap and the insertion ILM techniques were associated with high rates of MH closure in large MHs. The inverted ILM flap technique seemed to be more effective surgery for large MHs compared with the ILM insertion techniques in improving visual outcomes.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
554
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: ​RETINA® focuses exclusively on the growing specialty of vitreoretinal disorders. The Journal provides current information on diagnostic and therapeutic techniques. Its highly specialized and informative, peer-reviewed articles are easily applicable to clinical practice. In addition to regular reports from clinical and basic science investigators, RETINA® publishes special features including periodic review articles on pertinent topics, special articles dealing with surgical and other therapeutic techniques, and abstract cards. Issues are abundantly illustrated in vivid full color. Published 12 times per year, RETINA® is truly a “must have” publication for anyone connected to this field.
×
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