Fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling with inverted flap technique versus standard internal limiting membrane peeling for symptomatic myopic foveoschisis

被引:1
|
作者
Polito, Antonio [1 ]
Garruto, Giulio [1 ]
Maggio, Emilia [1 ]
Mete, Maurizio [1 ]
Guerriero, Massimo [1 ,2 ]
Pertile, Grazia [1 ]
机构
[1] IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hosp, Via Don Sempreboni 5 Neger, I-37024 Verona, Italy
[2] Univ Verona, Dept Cultures & Civilizat, I-37134 Verona, Italy
关键词
THICKNESS MACULAR HOLE; TRACTION MACULOPATHY; RETINAL-DETACHMENT; NATURAL COURSE; RETINOSCHISIS; PROGRESSION; VITRECTOMY; EVOLUTION; EYES;
D O I
10.1038/s41598-024-53097-x
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
To study the long-term outcomes of standard ILM peeling and fovea sparing with inverted flap (FSIF) peeling for symptomatic myopic foveoschisis (MF). This retrospective observational study included 36 eyes of 34 consecutive patients who underwent vitrectomy with standard ILM peeling and FSIF peeling for MF between April 2012 and march 2020. The primary outcome measures included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central foveal thickness (CFT) at 1 month and final visit and postoperative development of macular hole. There were 14 eyes in the standard ILM peeling group and 22 eyes and in the FSIF peeling groups with a mean FU of 34.2 months (SD 23.3; min. 12-max. 96) and 27.7 months (SD 14.9; min. 12-max. 63), respectively. In both groups BCVA was not significantly improved at 1 month but improved at last visit from 0.55 +/- 0.21 to 0.37 +/- 0.29 in the standard ILM peeling group (P = 0.0154) and from 0.57 +/- 0.27 to 0.28 +/- 0.23 in the FSIF peeling group (P < 0.0001). At 1 month and final visit CMT decreased from 572 +/- 183.5 <mu>m to 277.5 +/- 95.2 mu m and to 250.4 +/- 96.1 mu m, respectively, in the standard ILM peeling group and from 589.9 +/- 189.8 mu m to 383 +/- 110.1 mu m and 162.3 +/- 74.8 mu m in the FSIF peeling group (P < 0.001 for both groups at both time-points). The preoperative and postoperative BCVA and CMT showed no significant differences between groups. Three of the eyes in the standard ILM peeling group developed postoperative macular hole at 1, 10, 24 months, respectively, and none of the eyes in the FSIF peeling group. Multivariate analysis revealed that a better BCVA was the only independent factor correlated with the final BCVA. In this study, standard ILM peeling and FSIF peeling were both beneficial in improving the anatomy and function of eyes with MF. Postoperative MH may occur up to 2 years after standard peeling and seem effectively prevented by FSIF peeling.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling with inverted flap technique versus standard internal limiting membrane peeling for symptomatic myopic foveoschisis
    Antonio Polito
    Giulio Garruto
    Emilia Maggio
    Maurizio Mete
    Massimo Guerriero
    Grazia Pertile
    Scientific Reports, 14
  • [2] Vitrectomy with Fovea-Sparing Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling for Myopic Foveoschisis
    Seppey, C.
    Wolfensberger, T. J.
    KLINISCHE MONATSBLATTER FUR AUGENHEILKUNDE, 2017, 234 (04) : 497 - 500
  • [3] Anatomical and visual outcomes of fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling with or without inverted flap technique for myopic foveoschisis
    Zheng, Dezhi
    Huang, Zijing
    Zeng, Qin
    Wang, Yifan
    Chen, Shirong
    Yi, Jingsheng
    Fang, Danqi
    Huang, Dingguo
    Chen, Weiqi
    BMC OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2022, 22 (01)
  • [4] Anatomical and visual outcomes of fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling with or without inverted flap technique for myopic foveoschisis
    Dezhi Zheng
    Zijing Huang
    Qin Zeng
    Yifan Wang
    Shirong Chen
    Jingsheng Yi
    Danqi Fang
    Dingguo Huang
    Weiqi Chen
    BMC Ophthalmology, 22
  • [5] Fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling versus complete internal limiting membrane peeling for myopic traction maculopathy
    Iwasaki, Masanori
    Miyamoto, Hirotomo
    Okushiba, Utako
    Imaizumi, Hiroko
    JAPANESE JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2020, 64 (01) : 13 - 21
  • [6] Fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling versus complete internal limiting membrane peeling for myopic traction maculopathy
    Masanori Iwasaki
    Hirotomo Miyamoto
    Utako Okushiba
    Hiroko Imaizumi
    Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology, 2020, 64 : 13 - 21
  • [7] Comments on “Anatomical and visual outcomes of fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling with or without inverted flap technique for myopic foveoschisis”
    Yi-Ting Hsieh
    Jih-Pin Lin
    Chung-May Yang
    BMC Ophthalmology, 23
  • [8] Comments on "Anatomical and visual outcomes of fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling with or without inverted flap technique for myopic foveoschisis"
    Hsieh, Yi-Ting
    Lin, Jih-Pin
    Yang, Chung-May
    BMC OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2023, 23 (01)
  • [9] Efficacy of Fovea-Sparing Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling for Epiretinal Membrane Foveoschisis
    Sekine, Reio
    Kogo, Jiro
    Jujo, Tatsuya
    Sato, Keiji
    Arizono, Ibuki
    Kawagoe, Tatsukata
    Tokuda, Naoto
    Kitaoka, Yasushi
    Takagi, Hitoshi
    OPHTHALMIC RESEARCH, 2022, 65 (02) : 162 - 170
  • [10] Combined fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling with internal limiting membrane flap technique for progressive myopic traction maculopathy
    Jih-Pin Lin
    Chung-May Yang
    Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 2022, 260 : 489 - 496