-
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 -
Retina (Philadelphia, Pa.) Jan 2020To evaluate repeated surgery for idiopathic full-thickness macular hole that failed to close (FTC) after first surgery or reopened (RO) once originally closed. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To evaluate repeated surgery for idiopathic full-thickness macular hole that failed to close (FTC) after first surgery or reopened (RO) once originally closed.
METHODS
Systematic review and meta-analysis. Pubmed.gov and Cochrane Library were searched for studies in English presenting outcomes of idiopathic full-thickness macular hole that FTC or RO (case reports/series of <5 cases excluded).
OUTCOME MEASURES
Anatomical closure, postoperative best-corrected visual acuity, intraoperative/postoperative complications, and patient-reported outcomes. Meta-analysis was performed on aggregate and available individual participant data sets using the metafor package in R.
RESULTS
Twenty-eight eligible studies were identified. After reoperation, pooled estimates for anatomical closure were 78% (95% confidence interval 71-84%) and 80% (95% confidence interval 66-89%) for FTC and RO groups, respectively. On average, best-corrected visual acuity improved in both groups. However, only 15% (28 of 189 eyes) of FTC eyes achieved best-corrected visual acuity of ≥6/12. The pooled estimated probability of ≥2-line best-corrected visual acuity improvement was 58% in the FTC group (95% confidence interval 45-71%); meta-analysis was not possible in the RO group. The most common complication was cataract.
CONCLUSION
Reoperation for FTC or RO idiopathic full-thickness macular hole achieved a clinically meaningful visual acuity improvement in more than half of patients; high levels of vision (≥6/12), however, were uncommon.
Topics: Basement Membrane; Humans; Intraoperative Complications; Postoperative Complications; Reoperation; Retinal Perforations; Treatment Failure; Visual Acuity; Vitrectomy; Vitreoretinal Surgery
PubMed: 31335482
DOI: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000002564 -
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 -
Graefe's Archive For Clinical and... Jun 2018The aim of this systematic review was to determine the anatomical outcome-macular hole (MH) closure rate-and functional outcome-visual acuity (VA) improvement rate-of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
The aim of this systematic review was to determine the anatomical outcome-macular hole (MH) closure rate-and functional outcome-visual acuity (VA) improvement rate-of the inverted internal limiting membrane (ILM) flap technique for large MH.
METHODS
We searched for articles on large MH (> 400 μm) treated with inverted ILM flap technique in databases as of December 1, 2017. And single-arm meta-analysis was performed for the primary outcome of MH closure rate and the secondary outcome of VA improvement rate. In addition, we searched and pooled studies treating large MH with indocyanine green (ICG)-assisted ILM peeling as the reference. R software (version 2.15.2) was used for analysis.
RESULTS
This review includes eight studies that used inverted ILM flap technique to treat large MH (> 400 μm). Based on the single-arm meta-analysis performed in R 2.15.2, the pooled MH closure rate and VA improvement rate following inverted ILM flap technique were 95% (95% CI, 88 to 98%) and 75% (95% CI, 62 to 85%), respectively, in fixed-effect models. There was no substantial methodological heterogeneity. In addition, we selected four studies on large MH treated with ICG-assisted ILM peeling as the reference. The fixed-model pooled MH closure rate and VA improvement rate were 87% (95% CI, 79 to 92%) and 57% (95% CI, 46 to 68%), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Inverted ILM flap technique should be an effective and safe method for treating large MH, with high closure rates and good VA improvement. However, further studies in large randomized controlled trials on minimizing surgical complications and understanding the mechanism of this technique are necessary.
Topics: Basement Membrane; Humans; Retinal Perforations; Surgical Flaps; Tomography, Optical Coherence; Visual Acuity; Vitrectomy
PubMed: 29532170
DOI: 10.1007/s00417-018-3956-2 -
BMC Ophthalmology Nov 2017To evaluate the effects on vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling versus vitrectomy with inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique for macular... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling versus inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique for macular hole-induced retinal detachment: a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
To evaluate the effects on vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling versus vitrectomy with inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique for macular hole-induced retinal detachment (MHRD).
METHODS
Pubmed, Cochrane Library, and Embase were systematically searched for studies that compared ILM peeling with inverted ILM flap technique for macular hole-induced retinal detachment. The primary outcomes are the rate of retinal reattachment and the rate of macular hole closure 6 months later after initial surgery, the secondary outcome is the postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) 6 months later after initial surgery.
RESULTS
Four studies that included 98 eyes were selected. All the included studies were retrospective comparative studies. The preoperative best-corrected visual acuity was equal between ILM peeling and inverted ILM flap technique groups. It was indicated that the rate of retinal reattachment (odds ratio (OR) = 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI):0.03 to 0.69; P = 0.02) and macular hole closure (OR = 0.06, 95% CI:0.02 to 0.19; P < 0.00001) after initial surgery was higher in the group of vitrectomy with inverted ILM flap technique than that in the group of vitrectomy with ILM peeling. However, there was no statistically significant difference in postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (mean difference (MD) 0.18 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution; 95% CI -0.06 to 0.43 ; P = 0.14) between the two surgery groups.
CONCLUSION
Compared with ILM peeling, vitrectomy with inverted ILM flap technique resulted significantly higher of the rate of retinal reattachment and macular hole closure, but seemed does not improve postoperative best-corrected visual acuity.
Topics: Epiretinal Membrane; Humans; Retinal Detachment; Retinal Perforations; Retrospective Studies; Surgical Flaps; Vitrectomy
PubMed: 29179705
DOI: 10.1186/s12886-017-0619-8 -
Current Eye Research Feb 2017The purposes of this study were to (i) determine macular hole (MH) closure rates and visual outcomes by comparing two methods of managing traumatic MH (TMH)-an event... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSES
The purposes of this study were to (i) determine macular hole (MH) closure rates and visual outcomes by comparing two methods of managing traumatic MH (TMH)-an event resulting in severe loss of visual acuity (VA); (ii) characterize patients who undergo spontaneous TMH closure; (iii) determine which TMH patients should be observed before resorting to surgical repair; and (iv) elucidate factors that influence postoperative visual outcomes.
METHODS
Studies (n=10) of patients who were managed by surgery or observation for TMH were meta-analyzed retrospectively. Management modalities included surgical repair (surgery group) and observation for spontaneous hole closure (observation group). In addition, a 12-case series of articles (1990-2014) on spontaneous hole closure was statistically summarized. SAS and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) (version 3.0) were used for analysis.
RESULTS
For surgery group patients, the fixed-model pooled event rate for hole closure was 0.919 (range, 0.861-0.954) and for observation group patients, 0.368 (range, 0.236-0.448). The random-model pooled event rate for improvement of visual acuity (VA) for surgery group patients was 0.748 (range, 0.610-0.849) and for observation group patients, 0.505 (range, 0.397-0.613). For patients in both groups, the mean age of spontaneous closure was 18.71±10.64 years; mean size of TMHs, 0.18±0.06 decimal degrees (DD); and mean time for hole closure, 3.38±3.08 months. The pooled event rate for visual improvement was 0.748 (0.610-0.849).
CONCLUSIONS
Hole closure and VA improvement rates of surgery group patients were significantly higher than those for observation group patients. Patients of ≤ 24 years of age with MH sizes of ≤ 0.2DD were more likely to achieve spontaneous hole closure. The interval of time from injury to surgery was statistically significantly associated with the level of visual improvement.
Topics: Disease Management; Eye Injuries; Humans; Remission, Spontaneous; Retinal Perforations; Visual Acuity; Vitrectomy
PubMed: 27420902
DOI: 10.1080/02713683.2016.1175021 -
Graefe's Archive For Clinical and... Jul 2016We aimed to provide a meta-analysis of the factors affecting vitreomacular traction (VMT) resolution after ocriplasmin use. A comprehensive systematic review of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Ocriplasmin use for vitreomacular traction and macular hole: A meta-analysis and comprehensive review on predictive factors for vitreous release and potential complications.
PURPOSE
We aimed to provide a meta-analysis of the factors affecting vitreomacular traction (VMT) resolution after ocriplasmin use. A comprehensive systematic review of the complications after ocriplasmin use for VMT and macular hole was also done.
METHODS
A literature search in PubMed was performed for studies about ocriplasmin published before 30 June 2015. Then a meta-analysis of the factors affecting the VMT resolution after ocriplasmin use was done, providing the pooled odds ratios for each factor and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). We also described the potential adverse events after ocriplasmin use in a systematic review.
RESULTS
A total of 194 abstracts were screened and 19 eligible studies were included in the meta-analysis. Age <65 years, female gender, vitreomacular adhesion diameter <1500 μm, phakic lens status and epiretinal membrane absence were found as positive predictive factors for VMT resolution, while macular hole size <250 μm was significantly associated with macular hole closure at the meta-analytical level. Various complications after ocriplasmin use were reported by frequency, including mainly vitreous floaters, photopsias, visual acuity decrease, ellipsoid zone changes, subretinal fluid development, enlargement of macular hole, anterior segment changes and electroretinogram alterations. It has to be noted that significant methodological weaknesses were identified, such as the absence of control groups or lack of transparency in the recruitment process and the examination procedure.
CONCLUSIONS
It is important to carefully select patients for ocriplasmin injection, taking into account the various predictive factors for VMT resolution. Patients should be informed about the potential adverse events of ocriplasmin, although they mainly seemed to be transient and usually mild/moderate in severity, suggesting that ocriplasmin is a safe and effective new treatment alternative for VMT and macular hole. However, due to the limited study quality, the uncertainty concerning the efficacy of this new approach is increased.
Topics: Fibrinolysin; Humans; Intravitreal Injections; Peptide Fragments; Retinal Perforations; Treatment Outcome; Vitreous Detachment
PubMed: 27137631
DOI: 10.1007/s00417-016-3363-5 -
Retina (Philadelphia, Pa.) May 2016To evaluate the effect of internal limiting membrane peeling with brilliant blue G (BBG) for the treatment of macular hole compared with peeling procedures with other... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To evaluate the effect of internal limiting membrane peeling with brilliant blue G (BBG) for the treatment of macular hole compared with peeling procedures with other dyes or without dye.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were systematically reviewed. Outcome measures were the primary closure rate and postoperative best-corrected visual acuity.
RESULTS
Nine studies that included 846 eyes were selected. There was no significant difference in preoperative best-corrected visual acuity between the BBG and no BBG (i.e., other dyes or no dye) groups (mean difference -0.02 logMAR [equivalent to 1 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letter]; 95% confidence interval -0.09 to 0.04 [-2-4.5 ETDRS letters]; P = 0.45). The macular hole closure rate using BBG was not significantly different from that using indocyanine green (odds ratio 1.98; 95% confidence interval 0.71-5.48; P = 0.19). The postoperative best-corrected visual acuity was more favorable with BBG than with indocyanine green (mean difference -0.10 logMAR [5 ETDRS letters]; 95% confidence interval -0.16 to -0.03 [1.5-8 ETDRS letters]; P = 0.004) or with no BBG (mean difference -0.11 [5.5 ETDRS letters]; 95% confidence interval -0.18 to -0.04 [2-9 ETDRS letters]; P = 0.003).
CONCLUSION
BBG could contribute to better visual acuity outcome than other dyes for internal limiting membrane peeling in patients with macular hole; however, it does not significantly influence the closure rate.
Topics: Basement Membrane; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic; Humans; Indicators and Reagents; Postoperative Period; Retinal Perforations; Rosaniline Dyes; Staining and Labeling; Visual Acuity; Vitrectomy
PubMed: 27115851
DOI: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000000968