A three-step approach versus the inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique in large full thickness macular hole surgery: a comparative study.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY BMC Ophthalmology Pub Date : 2025-04-08 DOI:10.1186/s12886-025-04003-0
Dongwei Lai, Siao Tang, Chufeng Gu, Chunren Meng, Chunyang Cai, Shuai He, Qinghua Qiu
{"title":"A three-step approach versus the inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique in large full thickness macular hole surgery: a comparative study.","authors":"Dongwei Lai, Siao Tang, Chufeng Gu, Chunren Meng, Chunyang Cai, Shuai He, Qinghua Qiu","doi":"10.1186/s12886-025-04003-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the anatomical and functional outcomes of our novel surgery (a three-step approach) and the conventional inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique (IFT) in treating large full-thickness macular holes (FTMHs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective, consecutive, nonrandomized comparative study of patients who underwent either the novel surgery (n = 27, Group A) or IFT (n = 27, Group B). The main outcomes of MH closure rates and the best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-up were compared between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At 6 months postoperatively, MH closure was achieved in 24/27 patients in Group A and 22/27 patients in Group B (88.89% vs. 81.48%, P = 0.704) with U-shaped closure rates being significantly higher in Group A (P = 0.029). The average BCVA at month 6 was 0.69 ± 0.38 (LogMAR) in Group A and 0.91 ± 0.39 in Group B (P = 0.015) with the improvement in BCVA being significantly higher in Group A (0.50 ± 0.59 vs. 0.31 ± 0.59, P = 0.045). The recovery rates of ELM were significantly higher in Group A (P = 0.026).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our three-step approach greatly improves anatomical and functional outcomes compared with IFT. This novel surgery has a dominant advantage in earlier and higher ultimate closure rate, U-type closure rate, and ELM recovery rate, and more importantly, better recovery of BCVA.</p>","PeriodicalId":9058,"journal":{"name":"BMC Ophthalmology","volume":"25 1","pages":"182"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11978172/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-025-04003-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the anatomical and functional outcomes of our novel surgery (a three-step approach) and the conventional inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique (IFT) in treating large full-thickness macular holes (FTMHs).

Methods: This was a retrospective, consecutive, nonrandomized comparative study of patients who underwent either the novel surgery (n = 27, Group A) or IFT (n = 27, Group B). The main outcomes of MH closure rates and the best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-up were compared between the two groups.

Results: At 6 months postoperatively, MH closure was achieved in 24/27 patients in Group A and 22/27 patients in Group B (88.89% vs. 81.48%, P = 0.704) with U-shaped closure rates being significantly higher in Group A (P = 0.029). The average BCVA at month 6 was 0.69 ± 0.38 (LogMAR) in Group A and 0.91 ± 0.39 in Group B (P = 0.015) with the improvement in BCVA being significantly higher in Group A (0.50 ± 0.59 vs. 0.31 ± 0.59, P = 0.045). The recovery rates of ELM were significantly higher in Group A (P = 0.026).

Conclusions: Our three-step approach greatly improves anatomical and functional outcomes compared with IFT. This novel surgery has a dominant advantage in earlier and higher ultimate closure rate, U-type closure rate, and ELM recovery rate, and more importantly, better recovery of BCVA.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
三步入路与倒置内限制膜瓣技术在大全层黄斑裂孔手术中的比较研究。
目的:评价新型手术(三步入路)与传统的倒内限制膜瓣技术(IFT)治疗大全层黄斑裂孔(FTMHs)的解剖和功能效果。方法:这是一项回顾性、连续、非随机的比较研究,患者分别接受了新型手术(n = 27, a组)或IFT (n = 27, B组)。比较两组患者随访1、3、6个月时MH闭合率和最佳矫正视力(BCVA)的主要指标。结果:术后6个月,A组24/27例患者和B组22/27例患者实现了MH闭合(88.89%比81.48%,P = 0.704),其中A组u形闭合率显著高于A组(P = 0.029)。A组患者第6个月的平均BCVA为0.69±0.38 (LogMAR), B组为0.91±0.39 (P = 0.015), A组患者BCVA的改善明显高于A组(0.50±0.59 vs. 0.31±0.59,P = 0.045)。A组ELM的回收率显著高于对照组(P = 0.026)。结论:与IFT相比,我们的三步入路大大改善了解剖和功能结果。该新型手术在更早、更高的最终闭合率、u型闭合率、ELM恢复率等方面具有优势,更重要的是BCVA恢复更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Ophthalmology
BMC Ophthalmology OPHTHALMOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
441
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Ophthalmology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of eye disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
期刊最新文献
Laser peripheral iridotomy for treating recurrent uveitis-glaucoma-hyphema plus syndrome with a scleral fixed intraocular lens: a case report. Effect of calcium dobesilate on intraretinal cysts and exudates in non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy: a Fiji ImageJ analysis. Evaluation of reading performance in eyes simulated with different visual acuity and visual field impairment. Effectiveness of Phaco-chop, Stop&Chop, and the nitinol filament nuclear disassembly techniques for dense cataract removal. Evaluation of visual outcomes, optical quality, and patient satisfaction with a novel monofocal intraocular lens.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1