Multilayered inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique versus standard internal limiting membrane peeling for large macular holes: A comparative study

PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcome of vitrectomy with multilayered inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique (ML-IILM) versus vitrectomy with standard ILM peeling for large macular holes in terms of visual acuity and anatomical closure. METHODS: A hospital-based, prospective, randomized, interventional study was conducted during three calendar years with a total 150 eyes (75 in each group) in two groups—vitrectomy with ILM peeling (Group A) and vitrectomy with ML-IILM flap technique (Group B) after informed consent of study participants who met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: The mean minimum and maximum diameter of macular hole did not differ statistically in both the groups. Macular hole index had no significant difference between both groups Pre-operative visual acuity was not statistically significantly different between the two groups. During follow-up, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months was significantly better in Group B (0.12 ± 0.07 at 1 month, 0.14 ± 0.10 at 3 months, 0.18 ± 0.11 at 6 months, and 0.19 ± 0.12 at 12 months) compared to Group A (0.20 ± 0.11 at 1 month, 0.22 ± 0.13 at 3 months, 0.30 ± 0.12 at 6 months, and 0.31 ± 0.14 at 12 months) (P = 0.001 for each). Type 1 anatomical closure (flattening of cuff and opposition of edges of hole) was achieved in 78.66% (59/75) cases in Group A and 93.33% (70/75) cases in Group B (P 0.0016). CONCLUSION: Vitrectomy with multilayered inverted ILM flap technique had significantly higher anatomical closure and better visual outcome than vitrectomy with standard ILM peeling.