Hantao Zhou, Zichen Zhang, Shimeng Wang, Ao Pan, Shuting Wei, Jinghao Mei, Shuangqian Zhu, Fang Huang, Ronghan Wu, Zhong Lin
{"title":"Indications and outcomes of posterior scleral contraction and pars plana vitrectomy in myopic traction maculopathy: a retrospective study.","authors":"Hantao Zhou, Zichen Zhang, Shimeng Wang, Ao Pan, Shuting Wei, Jinghao Mei, Shuangqian Zhu, Fang Huang, Ronghan Wu, Zhong Lin","doi":"10.1159/000548499","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to characterize the differential indications and compare anatomical and visual outcomes between pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) and posterior scleral contraction (PSC) in eyes with myopic traction maculopathy (MTM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>One hundred seventy-five eyes with MTM from 157 patients who were treated with PSC or PPV and had at least 6 months of follow-up were retrospectively analysed. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was used to assess visual outcomes. Anatomical outcomes were assessed using optical coherence tomography.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The PPV and PSC groups included 87 and 88 eyes, respectively. Eyes in the PPV group presented with higher presence of epiretinal membrane (93.1% vs. 69.3%, P<0.001), larger macular hole (MH) diameter (128.0 μm vs. 0 μm, P=0.01), and more severe pattern of MH (e.g., full thickness MH 18.4% vs. 10.2%, P<0.001), whereas achieved better anatomical outcomes (MH recovery rate: 89.9% vs. 50.0%, P <0.001; incidence of complete or essential recovery: 82.8% vs. 61.4%, P <0.001; the median time to recovery: 90 days vs. 307 days. P<0.001). Additionally, better recovery of retinal profile in PPV group tended to be more significant in eyes with axial length (AL) ≤30 mm. Conversely, eyes in the PSC group presented with more advanced MTM Staging System (e.g., stage 4 13.6% vs. 4.6%, P=0.003) and larger highest cavity of maculoschisis or macular detachment (389.3 ± 229.8 μm vs. 322.2 ± 216.4 μm, P=0.048), resulting in significant reduction in AL postoperatively (29.9 ± 1.6 mm before surgery vs. 28.2 ± 1.6 mm at last follow-up, P <0.001). In multivariate linear regression analysis, type of operation did not have a significant impact on BCVA at last follow-up or on change in BCVA after surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PPV was typically performed for eyes with severer vitreoretinal interface abnormalities and achieved better outcomes, particularly in eyes with AL ≤ 30mm. PSC was performed for eyes with advanced MTM Staging System, providing better axial stabilization despite slower anatomical improvement. Both approaches improved visual acuity to a similar extent, irrespective of the surgical technique employed.</p>","PeriodicalId":19662,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-20"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000548499","RegionNum":4,"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: This study aimed to characterize the differential indications and compare anatomical and visual outcomes between pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) and posterior scleral contraction (PSC) in eyes with myopic traction maculopathy (MTM).
Methods: One hundred seventy-five eyes with MTM from 157 patients who were treated with PSC or PPV and had at least 6 months of follow-up were retrospectively analysed. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was used to assess visual outcomes. Anatomical outcomes were assessed using optical coherence tomography.
Results: The PPV and PSC groups included 87 and 88 eyes, respectively. Eyes in the PPV group presented with higher presence of epiretinal membrane (93.1% vs. 69.3%, P<0.001), larger macular hole (MH) diameter (128.0 μm vs. 0 μm, P=0.01), and more severe pattern of MH (e.g., full thickness MH 18.4% vs. 10.2%, P<0.001), whereas achieved better anatomical outcomes (MH recovery rate: 89.9% vs. 50.0%, P <0.001; incidence of complete or essential recovery: 82.8% vs. 61.4%, P <0.001; the median time to recovery: 90 days vs. 307 days. P<0.001). Additionally, better recovery of retinal profile in PPV group tended to be more significant in eyes with axial length (AL) ≤30 mm. Conversely, eyes in the PSC group presented with more advanced MTM Staging System (e.g., stage 4 13.6% vs. 4.6%, P=0.003) and larger highest cavity of maculoschisis or macular detachment (389.3 ± 229.8 μm vs. 322.2 ± 216.4 μm, P=0.048), resulting in significant reduction in AL postoperatively (29.9 ± 1.6 mm before surgery vs. 28.2 ± 1.6 mm at last follow-up, P <0.001). In multivariate linear regression analysis, type of operation did not have a significant impact on BCVA at last follow-up or on change in BCVA after surgery.
Conclusions: PPV was typically performed for eyes with severer vitreoretinal interface abnormalities and achieved better outcomes, particularly in eyes with AL ≤ 30mm. PSC was performed for eyes with advanced MTM Staging System, providing better axial stabilization despite slower anatomical improvement. Both approaches improved visual acuity to a similar extent, irrespective of the surgical technique employed.
期刊介绍：
''Ophthalmic Research'' features original papers and reviews reporting on translational and clinical studies. Authors from throughout the world cover research topics on every field in connection with physical, physiologic, pharmacological, biochemical and molecular biological aspects of ophthalmology. This journal also aims to provide a record of international clinical research for both researchers and clinicians in ophthalmology. Finally, the transfer of information from fundamental research to clinical research and clinical practice is particularly welcome.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
