Cargando…

Internal limiting membrane insertion technique combined with nerve growth factor injection for large macular hole

BACKGROUND: The study was proposed to determine whether nerve growth factor (NGF) combined with an internal limiting membrane (ILM) insertion was effective in the large idiopathic full-thickness macular hole (iFTMH) therapy. METHODS: A subset of 18 eyes (July 2015–October 2017) diagnosed as the larg...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Luyi, Li, Xiaoxia, Yang, Xiaoli, Shen, Yu, Wu, Miaoqin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6902465/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31823798
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-019-1258-z
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The study was proposed to determine whether nerve growth factor (NGF) combined with an internal limiting membrane (ILM) insertion was effective in the large idiopathic full-thickness macular hole (iFTMH) therapy. METHODS: A subset of 18 eyes (July 2015–October 2017) diagnosed as the large iFTMH were enrolled in this study. The subjects were treated using ILM insertion technique alone (ILM group) or ILM combined with NGF injection (NGF group) and the follow-up period was 6 months. Macular hole closure rates, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA, improvements using ETDRS), and optical coherence tomography (OCT) findings were analyzed at 1st, 3rd, and 6th months postoperatively. RESULTS: We found that macular holes in both groups fully closed. In comparison to ILM insertion group, the NGF group had better BCVA at the 3rd month (48.00 ± 2.392 vs 58.22 ± 2.957, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.159 to 18.29). The mean external limiting membrane (ELM, 422.2 ± 96 vs 674.9 ± 103.6, 95% CI: − 47.26 to 552.8) and ellipsoid zone (EZ, 496.7 ± 101.6 vs 766.7 ± 111.8, 95% CI: − 50.29 to 590.4) defects were significantly smaller in the NGF group at the 6th month in the follow-up examination. Complete recovery of ELM and EZ was observed in the NGF group in one eye of a patient and two eyes of two patients, respectively. In comparison, one eye’s ELM and another eye’s EZ were completely recovered in the ILM insertion group. CONCLUSION: Our results indicated that ILM insertion with NGF injection might be an effective technique for the initial surgical treatment of eyes with large MHs. The proposed approach yielded better recovery of the photoreceptor layers and consequently might have superior postoperative visual acuity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: chiCTR1900021711. Retrospectively registered 5 March 2019.