Cargando…

Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling vs no peeling for Macular Hole-induced Retinal Detachment (MHRD): a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: we conducted our meta-analysis of published studies to assess existing evidence about the efficacy and safety of vitrectomy with ILM peeling vs. that of vitrectomy with no ILM peeling for Macular hole-induced retinal detachment. METHODS: Databases, including Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Ovi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Su, Jing, Liu, Xinquan, Zheng, Lijun, Cui, Hongping
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4475314/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26091910
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-015-0048-5
_version_ 1782377446626033664
author Su, Jing
Liu, Xinquan
Zheng, Lijun
Cui, Hongping
author_facet Su, Jing
Liu, Xinquan
Zheng, Lijun
Cui, Hongping
author_sort Su, Jing
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: we conducted our meta-analysis of published studies to assess existing evidence about the efficacy and safety of vitrectomy with ILM peeling vs. that of vitrectomy with no ILM peeling for Macular hole-induced retinal detachment. METHODS: Databases, including Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Ovid, Web of Science, Wanfang and CNKI, were searched to identify studies comparing outcomes following vitrectomy with ILM peeling and that with no ILM peeling for macular hole-induced retinal detachment. The meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.1. RESULTS: Six comparative studies comprising 180 eyes were identified. It was indicated that the rate of retinal reattachment (Odds ratio (OR) = 3.03, 95 % Confidence interval (CI):1.35 to 6.78; P = 0.007) and macular hole closure (OR = 6.74, 95 % CI:3.26 to 13.93; P < 0.001) after initial surgery was higher and the rate of recurrent retinal detachment (OR = 0.08, 95 % CI:0.02 to 0.30; P = 0.0002) was lower in the group of vitrectomy with ILM peeling than that in the group of vitrectomy with no ILM peeling. However, the improved BCVA (Weighted mean difference (WMD) = 0.14, 95 % CI: −0.20 to 0.47; P = 0.42) and the rate of postoperative complications were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling is an efficient and safe procedure for macular hole-induced retinal detachment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4475314
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44753142015-06-21 Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling vs no peeling for Macular Hole-induced Retinal Detachment (MHRD): a meta-analysis Su, Jing Liu, Xinquan Zheng, Lijun Cui, Hongping BMC Ophthalmol Research Article BACKGROUND: we conducted our meta-analysis of published studies to assess existing evidence about the efficacy and safety of vitrectomy with ILM peeling vs. that of vitrectomy with no ILM peeling for Macular hole-induced retinal detachment. METHODS: Databases, including Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Ovid, Web of Science, Wanfang and CNKI, were searched to identify studies comparing outcomes following vitrectomy with ILM peeling and that with no ILM peeling for macular hole-induced retinal detachment. The meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.1. RESULTS: Six comparative studies comprising 180 eyes were identified. It was indicated that the rate of retinal reattachment (Odds ratio (OR) = 3.03, 95 % Confidence interval (CI):1.35 to 6.78; P = 0.007) and macular hole closure (OR = 6.74, 95 % CI:3.26 to 13.93; P < 0.001) after initial surgery was higher and the rate of recurrent retinal detachment (OR = 0.08, 95 % CI:0.02 to 0.30; P = 0.0002) was lower in the group of vitrectomy with ILM peeling than that in the group of vitrectomy with no ILM peeling. However, the improved BCVA (Weighted mean difference (WMD) = 0.14, 95 % CI: −0.20 to 0.47; P = 0.42) and the rate of postoperative complications were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling is an efficient and safe procedure for macular hole-induced retinal detachment. BioMed Central 2015-06-20 /pmc/articles/PMC4475314/ /pubmed/26091910 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-015-0048-5 Text en © Su et al. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Su, Jing
Liu, Xinquan
Zheng, Lijun
Cui, Hongping
Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling vs no peeling for Macular Hole-induced Retinal Detachment (MHRD): a meta-analysis
title Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling vs no peeling for Macular Hole-induced Retinal Detachment (MHRD): a meta-analysis
title_full Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling vs no peeling for Macular Hole-induced Retinal Detachment (MHRD): a meta-analysis
title_fullStr Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling vs no peeling for Macular Hole-induced Retinal Detachment (MHRD): a meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling vs no peeling for Macular Hole-induced Retinal Detachment (MHRD): a meta-analysis
title_short Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling vs no peeling for Macular Hole-induced Retinal Detachment (MHRD): a meta-analysis
title_sort vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling vs no peeling for macular hole-induced retinal detachment (mhrd): a meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4475314/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26091910
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-015-0048-5
work_keys_str_mv AT sujing vitrectomywithinternallimitingmembranepeelingvsnopeelingformacularholeinducedretinaldetachmentmhrdametaanalysis
AT liuxinquan vitrectomywithinternallimitingmembranepeelingvsnopeelingformacularholeinducedretinaldetachmentmhrdametaanalysis
AT zhenglijun vitrectomywithinternallimitingmembranepeelingvsnopeelingformacularholeinducedretinaldetachmentmhrdametaanalysis
AT cuihongping vitrectomywithinternallimitingmembranepeelingvsnopeelingformacularholeinducedretinaldetachmentmhrdametaanalysis