Comparison of the use of internal limiting membrane flaps versus conventional ILM peeling on post-operative anatomical and visual outcomes in large macular holes.
Journal
Eye (London, England)
ISSN: 1476-5454
Titre abrégé: Eye (Lond)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8703986
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 Mar 2024
16 Mar 2024
Historique:
received:
22
05
2023
accepted:
08
03
2024
revised:
11
02
2024
medline:
17
3
2024
pubmed:
17
3
2024
entrez:
17
3
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Idiopathic full-thickness macular hole (iFTMH) closure rates following conventional vitrectomy, gas tamponade and internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling decrease when the minimum linear diameter (MLD) ≥ 500 microns. ILM flap creation has been proposed to improve closure in larger holes. This study evaluated the anatomical and functional impact of ILM flap introduction to routine practice in iFTMH ≥500 microns. Retrospective, interventional analysis of prospectively collected data of 191 eyes from consecutive surgeries for primary iFTMH ≥500 microns performed by two surgeons between June 2018 and June 2022, during which both surgeons replaced ILM peeling with ILM flap creation. Post-operative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and anatomical closure were compared between Group 1 (ILM peel) and Group 2 (ILM flap) in an intention-to-treat analysis. Rates of iFTMH closure were greater in the ILM flap group (77/80; 96.3%) than the ILM peel group (94/110; 85.5%) (OR = 4.37, 95% CI = 1.23-15.55, p = 0.023). A non-significant increase in post-operative BCVA improvement was observed in the ILM flap group (p = 0.084). There was no statistically significant difference in final BCVA (p = 0.83). Multivariate logistic regression found only MLD (OR = 0.993, 95% CI = 0.989-0.997, p = 0.001) and ILM flap group (OR = 5.795, 95% CI = 1.313-25.570, p = 0.020) predicted primary closure. ILM flap creation improves closure rates in larger holes and should be considered routinely in iFTMH ≥500 microns. Whether ILM flaps affect post-operative visual function remains uncertain.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Idiopathic full-thickness macular hole (iFTMH) closure rates following conventional vitrectomy, gas tamponade and internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling decrease when the minimum linear diameter (MLD) ≥ 500 microns. ILM flap creation has been proposed to improve closure in larger holes. This study evaluated the anatomical and functional impact of ILM flap introduction to routine practice in iFTMH ≥500 microns.
METHODS
METHODS
Retrospective, interventional analysis of prospectively collected data of 191 eyes from consecutive surgeries for primary iFTMH ≥500 microns performed by two surgeons between June 2018 and June 2022, during which both surgeons replaced ILM peeling with ILM flap creation. Post-operative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and anatomical closure were compared between Group 1 (ILM peel) and Group 2 (ILM flap) in an intention-to-treat analysis.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Rates of iFTMH closure were greater in the ILM flap group (77/80; 96.3%) than the ILM peel group (94/110; 85.5%) (OR = 4.37, 95% CI = 1.23-15.55, p = 0.023). A non-significant increase in post-operative BCVA improvement was observed in the ILM flap group (p = 0.084). There was no statistically significant difference in final BCVA (p = 0.83). Multivariate logistic regression found only MLD (OR = 0.993, 95% CI = 0.989-0.997, p = 0.001) and ILM flap group (OR = 5.795, 95% CI = 1.313-25.570, p = 0.020) predicted primary closure.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
ILM flap creation improves closure rates in larger holes and should be considered routinely in iFTMH ≥500 microns. Whether ILM flaps affect post-operative visual function remains uncertain.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38493269
doi: 10.1038/s41433-024-03024-1
pii: 10.1038/s41433-024-03024-1
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Duker JS, Kaiser PK, Binder S, de Smet MD, Gaudric A, Reichel E, et al. The International Vitreomacular Traction Study Group classification of vitreomacular adhesion, traction, and macular hole. Ophthalmology. 2013;120:2611–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.07.042
pubmed: 24053995
Cho SC, Park SJ, Byun SJ, Woo SJ, Park KH. Five-year nationwide incidence of macular hole requiring surgery in Korea. Br J Ophthalmol. 2019;103:1619–23.
doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2018-313237
pubmed: 30674455
Darian-Smith E, Howie AR, Allen PL, Vote BJ. Tasmanian macular hole study: whole population-based incidence of full thickness macular hole. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2016;44:812–6.
doi: 10.1111/ceo.12801
pubmed: 27388943
McCannel CA, Ensminger JL, Diehl NN, Hodge DN. Population-based incidence of macular holes. Ophthalmology. 2009;116:1366–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.01.052
pubmed: 19576500
Forsaa VA, Lindtjørn B, Kvaløy JT, Frøystein T, Krohn J. Epidemiology and morphology of full-thickness macular holes. Acta Ophthalmol. 2018;96:397–404.
doi: 10.1111/aos.13618
pubmed: 29197164
Eckardt C, Eckardt U, Groos S, Luciano L, Reale E. [Removal of the internal limiting membrane in macular holes. Clinical and morphological findings]. Ophthalmologe. 1997;94:545–51.
doi: 10.1007/s003470050156
pubmed: 9376691
Steel DH, Donachie PHJ, Aylward GW, Laidlaw DA, Williamson TH, Yorston D. Factors affecting anatomical and visual outcome after macular hole surgery: findings from a large prospective UK cohort. Eye. 2021;35:316–25.
doi: 10.1038/s41433-020-0844-x
pubmed: 32231259
Ullrich S, Haritoglou C, Gass C, Schaumberger M, Ulbig MW, Kampik A. Macular hole size as a prognostic factor in macular hole surgery. Br J Ophthalmol. 2002;86:390–3.
doi: 10.1136/bjo.86.4.390
pubmed: 11914205
pmcid: 1771090
Ch’ng SW, Patton N, Ahmed M, Ivanova T, Baumann C, Charles S, et al. The manchester large macular hole study: is it time to reclassify large macular holes? Am J Ophthalmol. 2018;195:36–42.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2018.07.027
pubmed: 30071212
Michalewska Z, Michalewski J, Adelman RA, Nawrocki J. Inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique for large macular holes. Ophthalmology. 2010;117:2018–25.
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.02.011
pubmed: 20541263
Shiode Y, Morizane Y, Matoba R, Hirano M, Doi S, Toshima S, et al. The role of inverted internal limiting membrane flap in macular hole closure. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2017;58:4847–55.
doi: 10.1167/iovs.17-21756
pubmed: 28973331
Agrawal V, Jindal K, Dhakad Y, Rathore P, Khilnani K. Multilayered inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique versus standard internal limiting membrane peeling for large macular holes: a comparative study. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2022;70:909–13.
doi: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1530_21
pubmed: 35225542
pmcid: 9114613
Manasa S, Kakkar P, Kumar A, Chandra P, Kumar V, Ravani R. Comparative evaluation of standard ILM peel with inverted ILM flap technique in large macular holes: a prospective, randomized study. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2018;49:236–40.
doi: 10.3928/23258160-20180329-04
pubmed: 29664979
Kannan NB, Kohli P, Parida H, Adenuga OO, Ramasamy K. Comparative study of inverted internal limiting membrane (ILM) flap and ILM peeling technique in large macular holes: a randomized-control trial. BMC Ophthalmol. 2018;18:177.
doi: 10.1186/s12886-018-0826-y
pubmed: 30029621
pmcid: 6054750
Velez-Montoya R, Ramirez-Estudillo JA, Sjoholm-Gomez de Liano C, Bejar-Cornejo F, Sanchez-Ramos J, Guerrero-Naranjo JL, et al. Inverted ILM flap, free ILM flap and conventional ILM peeling for large macular holes. Int J Retin Vitreous. 2018;4:8.
doi: 10.1186/s40942-018-0111-5
Shen Y, Lin X, Zhang L, Wu M. Comparative efficacy evaluation of inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique and internal limiting membrane peeling in large macular holes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Ophthalmol. 2020;20:14.
doi: 10.1186/s12886-019-1271-2
pubmed: 31914954
pmcid: 6950886
Rizzo S, Tartaro R, Barca F, Caporossi T, Bacherini D, Giansanti F. Internal limiting membrane peeling versus inverted flap technique for treatment of full-thickness macular holes: a comparative study in a large series of patients. Retina. 2018;38:S73–s8.
doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000001985
pubmed: 29232338
Murphy DC, Al-Zubaidy M, Lois N, Scott N, Steel DH. The effect of macular hole duration on surgical outcomes: an individual participant data study of randomized controlled trials. Ophthalmology. 2023;130:152–63.
Chen SN. Large semicircular inverted internal limiting membrane flap in the treatment of macular hole in high myopia. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2017;255:2337–45.
doi: 10.1007/s00417-017-3808-5
pubmed: 28993905
Steel DH, Downey L, Greiner K, Heimann H, Jackson TL, Koshy Z, et al. The design and validation of an optical coherence tomography-based classification system for focal vitreomacular traction. Eye. 2016;30:314–24.
doi: 10.1038/eye.2015.262
pubmed: 26768921
pmcid: 4763137
Ventre L, Fallico M, Longo A, Parisi G, Russo A, Bonfiglio V, et al. Conventional internal limiting membrane peeling versus inverted flap for small-to-medium idiopathic macular hole: a randomized trial. Retina. 2022;42:2251–7.
doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000003622
pubmed: 36084331
pmcid: 9665942
Baumann C, Kaye S, Iannetta D, Sultan Z, Dwivedi R, Pearce I. Effect of inverted internal limiting membrane flap on closure rate, postoperative visual acuity, and restoration of outer retinal layers in primary idiopathic macular hole surgery. Retina. 2020;40:1955–63.
doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000002707
pubmed: 31834129
The Royal College of Ophthalmologists. Guidance document: Prioritisation of ophthalmic procedures: The Royal College of Ophthalmologists. 2020. https://www.rcophth.ac.uk/resources-listing/prioritisation-of-ophthalmic-procedures/ .
Leisser C, Ruiss M, Pilwachs C, Findl O. ILM peeling with ILM flap transposition vs. classic ILM peeling for small and medium macula holes-a prospective randomized trial. Spektrum Augenheilkd. 2023;37:9–14.
doi: 10.1007/s00717-022-00515-y
pubmed: 35221539
Ehrhardt A, Delpuech M, Luc A, Zessler A, Pastor G, Angioi-Duprez K, et al. Dissociated optic nerve fiber layer appearance after macular hole surgery: a randomized controlled trial comparing the temporal inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique with conventional peeling. Ophthalmol Retina. 2023;7:227–35.
doi: 10.1016/j.oret.2022.09.002
pubmed: 36109006
Yamashita T, Sakamoto T, Terasaki H, Iwasaki M, Ogushi Y, Okamoto F, et al. Best surgical technique and outcomes for large macular holes: retrospective multicentre study in Japan. Acta Ophthalmol. 2018;96:e904–e10.
doi: 10.1111/aos.13795
pubmed: 29671948
Chou HD, Liu L, Wang CT, Chen KJ, Wu WC, Hwang YS, et al. Single-layer inverted internal limiting membrane flap versus conventional peel for small- or medium-sized full-thickness macular holes. Am J Ophthalmol. 2022;235:111–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2021.08.016
pubmed: 34509434
Kwak JJ, Byeon SH. Comparison of long-term visual and anatomical outcomes between internal limiting membrane flap and peeling techniques for macular holes with a propensity score analysis. Eye. 2022;37:1207–13.
doi: 10.1038/s41433-022-02103-5
pubmed: 35585135
Baba T, Yamamoto S, Arai M, Arai E, Sugawara T, Mitamura Y, et al. Correlation of visual recovery and presence of photoreceptor inner/outer segment junction in optical coherence images after successful macular hole repair. Retina. 2008;28:453–8.
doi: 10.1097/IAE.0b013e3181571398
pubmed: 18327138
Wakabayashi T, Fujiwara M, Sakaguchi H, Kusaka S, Oshima Y. Foveal microstructure and visual acuity in surgically closed macular holes: spectral-domain optical coherence tomographic analysis. Ophthalmology. 2010;117:1815–24.
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.01.017
pubmed: 20472291
Itoh Y, Inoue M, Rii T, Hiraoka T, Hirakata A. Significant correlation between visual acuity and recovery of foveal cone microstructures after macular hole surgery. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012;153:111–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2011.05.039
pubmed: 21880295
Bleidißel N, Friedrich J, Feucht N, Klaas J, Maier M. Visual improvement and regeneration of retinal layers in eyes with small, medium, and large idiopathic full-thickness macular holes treated with the inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique over a period of 12 months. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2022;260:3161–71.
doi: 10.1007/s00417-022-05676-9
pubmed: 35475915
pmcid: 9477954
Rossi T, Gelso A, Costagliola C, Trillo C, Costa A, Gesualdo C, et al. Macular hole closure patterns associated with different internal limiting membrane flap techniques. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2017;255:1073–8.
doi: 10.1007/s00417-017-3598-9
pubmed: 28161828