Cargando…

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, inte...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Agrawal, Vishal, Jindal, Khushbu, Dhakad, Yogendra, Rathore, Priyanka, Khilnani, Kamlesh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9114613/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35225542
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_1530_21
_version_ 1784709817250611200
author Agrawal, Vishal
Jindal, Khushbu
Dhakad, Yogendra
Rathore, Priyanka
Khilnani, Kamlesh
author_facet Agrawal, Vishal
Jindal, Khushbu
Dhakad, Yogendra
Rathore, Priyanka
Khilnani, Kamlesh
author_sort Agrawal, Vishal
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9114613
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91146132022-05-19 Multilayered inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique versus standard internal limiting membrane peeling for large macular holes: A comparative study Agrawal, Vishal Jindal, Khushbu Dhakad, Yogendra Rathore, Priyanka Khilnani, Kamlesh Indian J Ophthalmol Special Focus, Retina, Original Article 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. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022-03 2022-02-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9114613/ /pubmed/35225542 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_1530_21 Text en Copyright: © 2022 Indian Journal of Ophthalmology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Special Focus, Retina, Original Article
Agrawal, Vishal
Jindal, Khushbu
Dhakad, Yogendra
Rathore, Priyanka
Khilnani, Kamlesh
Multilayered inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique versus standard internal limiting membrane peeling for large macular holes: A comparative study
title Multilayered inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique versus standard internal limiting membrane peeling for large macular holes: A comparative study
title_full Multilayered inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique versus standard internal limiting membrane peeling for large macular holes: A comparative study
title_fullStr Multilayered inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique versus standard internal limiting membrane peeling for large macular holes: A comparative study
title_full_unstemmed Multilayered inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique versus standard internal limiting membrane peeling for large macular holes: A comparative study
title_short Multilayered inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique versus standard internal limiting membrane peeling for large macular holes: A comparative study
title_sort multilayered inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique versus standard internal limiting membrane peeling for large macular holes: a comparative study
topic Special Focus, Retina, Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9114613/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35225542
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_1530_21
work_keys_str_mv AT agrawalvishal multilayeredinvertedinternallimitingmembraneflaptechniqueversusstandardinternallimitingmembranepeelingforlargemacularholesacomparativestudy
AT jindalkhushbu multilayeredinvertedinternallimitingmembraneflaptechniqueversusstandardinternallimitingmembranepeelingforlargemacularholesacomparativestudy
AT dhakadyogendra multilayeredinvertedinternallimitingmembraneflaptechniqueversusstandardinternallimitingmembranepeelingforlargemacularholesacomparativestudy
AT rathorepriyanka multilayeredinvertedinternallimitingmembraneflaptechniqueversusstandardinternallimitingmembranepeelingforlargemacularholesacomparativestudy
AT khilnanikamlesh multilayeredinvertedinternallimitingmembraneflaptechniqueversusstandardinternallimitingmembranepeelingforlargemacularholesacomparativestudy