-
Retina (Philadelphia, Pa.) Jun 2021To evaluate fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling in vitrectomy compared with traditional complete ILM peeling in vitreomacular interface diseases,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To evaluate fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling in vitrectomy compared with traditional complete ILM peeling in vitreomacular interface diseases, including macular hole (MH), epiretinal membrane, macular foveoschisis, myopic traction maculopathy, and the like.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, CNKI Databases, and the ClinicalTrials.gov website (PROSPERO number CRD42020187401) were searched. Controlled trials comparing fovea-sparing with complete ILM peeling were included. Postoperative changes in best-corrected visual acuity, central retinal thickness in vitreomacular interface diseases, the incidence of MH closure in MH cases, full-thickness macular hole development in non-MH cases, and retinal reattachment in retinoschisis cases were extracted.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies (487 eyes) were eligible. Compared with complete ILM peeling, the fovea-sparing technique revealed significant improvement in best-corrected visual acuity ( logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution; weighted mean difference = -0.70; 95% confidence interval, -1.11 to -0.30), and a reduced incidence of full-thickness macular hole was noted in non-MH cases (risk ratios = 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.76). However, no significant differences in mean change in central retinal thickness, incidence of MH closure in MH cases, and retinal reattachment in retinoschisis cases were noted.
CONCLUSION
Based on current evidence, fovea-sparing ILM peeling significantly improve visual outcomes and decrease complications of full-thickness macular hole development in vitreomacular interface diseases.
Topics: Basement Membrane; Fovea Centralis; Humans; Retinal Diseases; Tomography, Optical Coherence; Visual Acuity; Vitrectomy
PubMed: 34001832
DOI: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000003140 -
International Journal of Ophthalmology 2019To evaluate the effect of internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling with indocyanine green (ICG), brilliant blue G (BBG), triamcinolone acetonide (TA), trypan blue (TB),...
AIM
To evaluate the effect of internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling with indocyanine green (ICG), brilliant blue G (BBG), triamcinolone acetonide (TA), trypan blue (TB), or without dye for the treatment of idiopathic macular hole (IMH).
METHODS
A search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) for related studies published before October 2018.
RESULTS
A total of 29 studies and 2514 eyes were included in this network Meta-analysis. For IMH closure, the rank from the best to the worse treatment was: BBG, TB, TA, ICG, and no dye. There was a significant difference in postoperative IMH closure rate between BBG and no dye. The rank of the best to the worse treatment to improve visual acuity was: BBG, TB, no dye, TA, and ICG. The improvement rate of visual acuity after using BBG was significantly higher than ICG. The improvement rate of visual acuity was more favorable with TB than ICG, TA, and no dye.
CONCLUSION
BBG can contribute to better anatomical and functional outcomes compared to other dyes for ILM peeling in patients with IMH. The results show that the best treatment of ILM peeling with dyes is BBG.
PubMed: 31850178
DOI: 10.18240/ijo.2019.12.15 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2019A giant retinal tear (GRT) is a full-thickness neurosensory retinal break extending for 90° or more in the presence of a posterior vitreous detachment. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
A giant retinal tear (GRT) is a full-thickness neurosensory retinal break extending for 90° or more in the presence of a posterior vitreous detachment.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of pars plana vitrectomy combined with scleral buckle versus pars plana vitrectomy alone for eyes with giant retinal tear.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 8), which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; Ovid MEDLINE; Embase.com; PubMed; Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS); ClinicalTrials.gov; and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We did not use any date or language restrictions in our electronic search. We last searched the electronic databases on 16 August 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing pars plana vitrectomy combined with scleral buckle versus pars plana vitrectomy alone for giant retinal tear regardless of age, gender, lens status (e.g. phakic or pseudophakic eyes) of the affected eye(s), or etiology of GRT among participants enrolled in these trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed titles and abstracts, then full-text articles, using Covidence. Any differences in classification between the two review authors were resolved through discussion. Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias of included trials.
MAIN RESULTS
We found two RCTs in abstract format (105 participants randomized). Neither RCT was published in full. Based on the data presented in the abstracts, scleral buckling might be beneficial (relative risk of re-attachement ranged from 3.0 to 4.4), but the findings are inconclusive due to a lack of peer reviewed publication and insufficient information for assessing risk of bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found no conclusive evidence from RCTs on which to base clinical recommendations for scleral buckle combined with pars plana vitrectomy for giant retinal tear. RCTs are clearly needed to address this evidence gap. Such trials should be randomized, and patients should be classified by giant retinal tear characteristics (extension (90º, 90º to 180º, > 180º), location (oral, anterior, posterior to equator)), proliferative vitreoretinopathy stage, and endotamponade. Analysis should include both short-term (three months and six months) and long-term (one year to two years) outcomes for primary retinal reattachment, mean change in best corrected visual acuity, study eyes that required second surgery for retinal reattachment, and adverse events such as elevation of intraocular pressure above 21 mmHg, choroidal detachment, cystoid macular edema, macular pucker, proliferative vitreoretinopathy, and progression of cataract in initially phakic eyes.
Topics: Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retinal Detachment; Retinal Perforations; Scleral Buckling; Treatment Outcome; Vitrectomy
PubMed: 31840810
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012646.pub2 -
PloS One 2024To evaluate the efficacy of inverted internal limiting membrane (ILM) flap technique in full-thickness macular holes (MHs) with a size of ≤400 μm compared to the ILM... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To evaluate the efficacy of inverted internal limiting membrane (ILM) flap technique in full-thickness macular holes (MHs) with a size of ≤400 μm compared to the ILM peeling technique.
METHODS
Related literatures that compared inverted ILM flap and ILM peeling in MHs ≤ 400 μm were reviewed by searching electronic databases including Pubmed, EMbase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library up to April 2023. The primary outcome measure was hole closure rate, and the secondary outcome measures were the mean postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), retinal sensitivity, and outer status of the retinal layers, including the external limiting membrane and ellipsoid zone. The quality of the articles was assessed according to the revised version of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials or the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. In the case of heterogeneity, a sensitivity analysis was conducted, and publication bias was visually evaluated using a funnel plot.
RESULTS
This review included six studies with 610 eyes for the primary outcome and 385 eyes for the secondary outcomes, which were two randomized control trials and four retrospective studies. Pooled data revealed that the overall MH closure rate was 99.4% in the inverted ILM flap group and 96.2% in the ILM peeling group, without significant difference between the two groups (odds ratio = 3.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.82~18.69; P = 0.09). The inverted ILM flap technique did not have a favorable effect on the BCVA, retinal sensitivity, or recovery of the outer retinal layers. These results were consistent with those of the subgroup analysis of the different follow-up periods. No significant publication bias was observed.
CONCLUSION
In eyes with MHs of ≤400 μm, both techniques demonstrated excellent surgical outcomes without significant differences. Therefore, surgical techniques can be selected according to surgeon preferences.
Topics: Retinal Perforations; Humans; Surgical Flaps; Visual Acuity; Vitrectomy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38683767
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0302481 -
BMC Ophthalmology Jan 2020The purpose of this study was to compare the anatomical and visual outcomes of inverted internal limiting membrane (ILM) flap technique and internal limiting membrane... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
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.
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this study was to compare the anatomical and visual outcomes of inverted internal limiting membrane (ILM) flap technique and internal limiting membrane peeling in large macular holes (MH).
METHODS
Related studies were reviewed by searching electronic databases of Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library. We searched for articles that compared inverted ILM flap technique with ILM peeling for large MH (> 400 μm). Double-arm meta-analysis was performed for the primary end point that was the rate of MH closure, and the secondary end point was postoperative visual acuity (VA). Heterogeneity, publication bias, sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis were conducted to guarantee the statistical power.
RESULTS
This review included eight studies involving 593 eyes, 4 randomized control trials and 4 retrospective studies. After sensitivity analysis for eliminating the heterogeneity of primary outcome, the pooled data showed the rate of MH closure with inverted ILM flap technique group was statistically significantly higher than ILM peeling group (odds ratio (OR) = 3.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.89 to 8.27; P = 0.0003). At the follow-up duration of 3 months, postoperative VA was significantly better in the group of inverted ILM flap than ILM peeling (mean difference (MD) = - 0.16, 95% CI = - 0.23 to 0.09; P < 0.00001). However, there was no difference in visual outcomes between the two groups of different surgical treatments at relatively long-term follow-up over 6 months (MD = 0.01, 95% CI = - 0.12 to 0.15; P = 0.86).
CONCLUSION
Vitrectomy with inverted ILM flap technique had a better anatomical outcome than ILM peeling. Flap technique also had a signifcant visual gain in the short term, but the limitations in visual recovery at a longer follow-up was found.
Topics: Basement Membrane; Epiretinal Membrane; Humans; Retinal Perforations; Retrospective Studies; Surgical Flaps; Treatment Outcome; Visual Acuity; Vitrectomy
PubMed: 31914954
DOI: 10.1186/s12886-019-1271-2 -
Ophthalmic Research 2021Myopic traction maculopathy (MTM) is a major cause of impaired vision in eyes with high myopia, which is characterized by retinal thickening, retinoschisis, lamellar... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Myopic traction maculopathy (MTM) is a major cause of impaired vision in eyes with high myopia, which is characterized by retinal thickening, retinoschisis, lamellar macular hole (MH), and foveal retinal detachment. Pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling (ILMP) has been developed to theoretically prevent postoperative MH formation and improve best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) gain for MTM compared with the complete ILMP. However, in previous studies, the anatomic and visual outcomes still remain uncertain and controversial.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study was to evaluate the anatomic and visual outcomes of vitrectomy with fovea-sparing ILMP for the treatment of MTM compared with complete ILMP.
METHODS
Articles from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were systematically retrieved. The main outcomes were the rate of a postoperative MH and visual improvement of BCVA (converted to logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR]). The secondary outcomes were the proportion of patients with visual improvement, the proportion of anatomic success, preoperative and postoperative BCVA, preoperative and postoperative central fovea thickness, and time to anatomic resolution.
RESULTS
There was a higher rate of postoperative MH formation (odds ratio [OR] 5.64; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.72-18.44; p = 0.004) and less improvement of BCVA in logMAR (mean difference [MD] -0.09; 95% CI: -0.18 to 0.00; p = 0.04) in the complete ILMP group. However, postoperative BCVA (MD 0.14; 95% CI: 0.00-0.27; p = 0.05), the proportion of patients with visual improvement (OR 0.39; 95% CI: 0.15-1.02; p = 0.05), postoperative central foveal thickness (MD -10.02; 95% CI: -24.4 to 4.36; p = 0.17), the rate of anatomic success (MD 0.39; 95% CI: 0.15-1.03; p = 0.06), and time to resolution (MD -1.65; 95% CI: -3.66 to 0.36; p = 0.11) showed no significant differences.
CONCLUSION
PPV combined with the fovea-sparing ILMP could contribute to a lower MH formation rate and more improvement of BCVA in logMAR than PPV combined with complete ILMP.
Topics: Basement Membrane; Humans; Macular Degeneration; Myopia, Degenerative; Retinal Perforations; Retrospective Studies; Tomography, Optical Coherence; Traction; Visual Acuity; Vitrectomy
PubMed: 34425571
DOI: 10.1159/000519021 -
Eye (London, England) Oct 2019To evaluate the effect of vitrectomy with inverted internal limiting membrane (ILM) flap for the treatment of macular hole retinal detachment (MHRD) in high myopia... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Vitrectomy with inverted internal limiting membrane flap versus internal limiting membrane peeling for macular hole retinal detachment in high myopia: a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis.
PURPOSE
To evaluate the effect of vitrectomy with inverted internal limiting membrane (ILM) flap for the treatment of macular hole retinal detachment (MHRD) in high myopia compared with that of ILM peeling.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Ovid, Wan Fang and CNKI were systematically reviewed. The primary outcome parameters were the MH closure rate, retinal reattachment rate and postoperative BCVA. Secondary outcome parameters, included intraoperative or postoperative complications.
RESULTS
Seven retrospective comparative studies including 228 eyes were selected. No significant difference was detected in either postoperative BCVA (MD -0.07; 95% CI: -0.17 to 0.03; p = 0.16) or the improvement in postoperative BCVA (MD -0.17; 95% CI: -0.50 to 0.16; p = 0.32) between the ILM flap group and ILM peeling group. The retinal reattachment rate using inverted ILM flap was not significantly different from that using ILM peeling (odds ratio (OR) 2.24; 95% CI: 0.75-6.73; p = 0.15). The MH closure rate was higher with inverted ILM flap than with ILM peeling (OR 11.86; 95% CI: 5.65 to 24.92; p < 0.00001). There was no significant difference in intraoperative or postoperative complications, including concomitant cataract rate (OR 1.22; 95% CI: 0.42-3.58; p = 0.71).
CONCLUSION
The inverted ILM flap technique could contribute to a higher MH closure rate than ILM peeling, but visual improvement was similar. Both surgical methods could obtain a high-retinal reattachment rate with fewer intraoperative and postoperative complications.
Topics: Basement Membrane; Female; Humans; Male; Myopia, Degenerative; Retinal Detachment; Retinal Perforations; Retrospective Studies; Surgical Flaps; Vitrectomy
PubMed: 31073163
DOI: 10.1038/s41433-019-0458-3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2019Rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) is a separation of neurosensory retina from the underlying retinal pigment epithelium. It is caused by retinal tears, which let... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) is a separation of neurosensory retina from the underlying retinal pigment epithelium. It is caused by retinal tears, which let fluid pass from the vitreous cavity to the subretinal space. Pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), scleral buckling surgery and pneumatic retinopexy are three accepted management strategies whose efficacy remains controversial. Pneumatic retinopexy is considered in a separate Cochrane Review.
OBJECTIVES
The primary objective of this review was to assess the efficacy of PPV versus scleral buckling for the treatment of simple RRD (primary RRD of any extension with up to two clock hours large break(s) regardless of their anterior/posterior localisation) in people with (phakia) or without (aphakia) a natural lens in the eye, or with an artificial lens (pseudophakia). A secondary objective was to assess any data on economic and quality-of-life measures.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; MEDLINE; Embase; LILACS; the ISRCTN registry; ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP. The date of the search was 5 December 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PPV versus scleral buckling surgery with at least three months of follow-up.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodology. Two review authors independently extracted the data and study characteristics from the studies identified as eligible after initial screening. We considered the following outcomes: primary retinal reattachment, postoperative visual acuity, final anatomical success, recurrence of retinal detachment, number of interventions needed to achieve final anatomical success, quality of life and adverse effects. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
This review included 10 RCTs (1307 eyes of 1307 participants) from Europe, India, Iran, Japan and Mexico, which compared PPV and scleral buckling for RRD repair. Two of these 10 studies compared PPV combined with scleral buckling with scleral buckling alone (54 participants). All studies were high or unclear risk of bias on at least one domain. Five studies were funded by non-commercial sources, while the other five studies did not report source of funding.There was little or no difference in the proportion of participants who achieved retinal reattachment at least 3 months after the operation in the PPV group compared to those in the scleral buckling group (risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.98 to 1.16; 9 RCTs, 1261 participants, low-certainty evidence). Approximately 67 in every 100 people treated with scleral buckling had retinal reattachment by 3 to 12 months. Treatment with PPV may result in 4 more people with retinal reattachment in every 100 people treated (95% confidence interval (CI) 2 fewer to 11 more).There was no evidence of any important difference in postoperative visual acuity between participants in the PPV group compared to those in the scleral buckling group (mean difference (MD) 0.00 logMAR, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.10, 6 RCTs, 1138 participants, low-certainty evidence).There was little or no difference in final anatomical success between participants in the PPV group and scleral buckling group (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.04, 9 RCTs, 1235 participants, low-certainty evidence). There were 94 out of 100 people treated with control (scleral buckling) that achieved final anatomical success compared to 96 out of 100 in the PPV group.Retinal redetachment was reported in fewer participants in the PPV group compared to the scleral buckling group (RR 0.75 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.96, 9 RCTs, 1320 participants, low-certainty evidence). Approximately 28 in every 100 people treated with scleral buckling had retinal detachment by 3 to 36 months. Treatment with PPV may result in seven fewer people with retinal detachment in every 100 people treated (95% CI 1 to 11 fewer).Participants treated with PPV on average needed fewer interventions to achieve final anatomical success but the difference was small and data were skewed (MD -0.20, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.06, 2 RCTs, 682 participants, very low-certainty evidence).Very low-certainty evidence on quality of life suggested that more people in the PPV group were "satisfied with vision" compared with the scleral buckling group (RR 6.22, 95% CI 0.88 to 44.09, 1 RCT, 32 participants).All included studies reported adverse effects, however, it was not always clear whether they were reported as number of participants or number of adverse effects. Cataract development or progression was more prevalent in the PPV group (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.45 to 2.01), choroidal detachment was more prevalent in the scleral buckling group (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.65) and new/iatrogenic breaks were observed only in the PPV group (RR 8.21, 95% CI 1.91 to 35.21). Estimates of the relative frequency of other adverse effects, including postoperative proliferative vitreoretinopathy, postoperative increase in intraocular pressure, development of cystoid macular oedema, macular pucker and strabismus were imprecise. Evidence for adverse effects was low-certainty evidence.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low- or very low-certainty evidence indicates that there may be little or no difference between PPV and scleral buckling in terms of primary success rate, visual acuity gain and final anatomical success in treating primary RRD. Low-certainty evidence suggests that there may be less retinal redetachment in the PPV group. Some adverse events appeared to be more common in the PPV group, such as cataract progression and new iatrogenic breaks, whereas others were more commonly seen in the scleral buckling group such as choroidal detachment.
Topics: Humans; Postoperative Complications; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Retinal Detachment; Retinal Perforations; Scleral Buckling; Treatment Outcome; Visual Acuity; Vitrectomy
PubMed: 30848830
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009562.pub2 -
Acta Ophthalmologica Jun 2019Flashes and floaters are the hallmark symptoms of a posterior vitreous detachment (PVD) which itself is related to an increased risk of the development of retinal tears,...
Flashes and floaters are the hallmark symptoms of a posterior vitreous detachment (PVD) which itself is related to an increased risk of the development of retinal tears, retinal detachment and vitreous haemorrhage. The aim of this study is to assess the associations between different symptoms related to PVD and the risk of developing retinal tears. A systematic review of articles written in English, using MEDLINE, Embase (via Embase.com) and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (1996-2017) was conducted. Search terms included five elements: PVD, retinal tears, retinal detachment, floaters and flashes. Independent extraction of articles was conducted by two authors using predefined data fields, including study quality indicators. Thirteen studies fulfilled the selection criteria. Analysis of pooled data revealed that presence of isolated flashes was associated with the development of retinal tears in 5.3% of symptomatic eyes [mean 2.9 eyes; 95% CI (2.1, 5.7)].Conversely, floaters alone had a stronger association with retinal tears (16.5% of eyes), as compared to flashes. The association to retinal tears was even greater for those patients reporting both flashes and floaters [mean 17.8 eyes (20.0%); 95% CI (17.4, 18.1)]. Retinal and/or vitreous haemorrhage was also associated with the presence and later development of retinal tears [mean 12.5 eyes (30.0%); 95% CI (11.7, 13.9)]. Patients with more than 10 floaters or a cloud in their vision had a high risk of developing retinal tears (OR19.8, p-value 0.032). In the setting of a PVD, the onset of flashes and floaters, and the presence of retinal and/or vitreous haemorrhage are risk factors for the development of retinal tears. The association is greater when both symptoms are present, and even greater when the patient reports more than 10 floaters, a curtain or a cloud and/or there is a positive finding of a vitreous or retinal haemorrhage. This study supports the necessity of an immediate examination of patients presenting with symptoms related to a PVD, and a follow-up examination might be prudent in a subgroup of these patients.
Topics: Fluorescein Angiography; Fundus Oculi; Global Health; Humans; Incidence; Retina; Retinal Perforations; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Vitreous Body; Vitreous Detachment
PubMed: 30632695
DOI: 10.1111/aos.14012