Published in:
01-07-2021 | Silicone | Retinal Disorders
Persistent macular holes — what is the best strategy for revision?
Published in: Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology | Issue 7/2021
Login to get accessAbstract
Purpose
This study aims to analyze the success rate and functional outcome after revision surgery of persistent idiopathic full-thickness macular holes in a large patient cohort and to identify the optimal tamponade strategy and the value of new adjunctive manipulation techniques for persistent macular hole (pMH) closure.
Methods
Retrospective, comparative, non-consecutive case series of all revisional surgeries for idiopathic pMH between 2011 and 2019 at the Eye Clinic Sulzbach were identified. Of 1163 idiopathic MH surgeries, 74 eyes of 74 patients had pMH. Of those, group 1 (n = 38) had vitrectomy with tamponade alone (20% sulfur hexafluoride gas, 15% hexafluoroethane gas, silicone oil 5000, Densiron®), while group 2 (n = 36) included tamponade with adjuvant manipulation (internal limiting membrane (ILM) translocation, subretinal fluid injection, epiretinal amniotic membrane, free retina graft, or autologous blood). Main statistical outcomes were anatomic closure rate, visual acuity (VA), minimum linear diameter (MLD), and base diameter (BD).
Results
Overall total anatomical success rate was 81.1% and mean VA improved 3.5 lines from LogMAR 1.03 ± 0.30 to 0.68 ± 0.38 (p < .001). Preoperative MLD or BD had no effect on total anatomic success (p = 0.074, p = 0.134, respectively). When comparing the two groups, slightly better anatomic success rates were achieved in group 1 (84.2%) compared to that in group 2 (77.8%) (p = 0.68). Final VA in group 1 (LogMAR 0.67 ± 0.39) outperformed group 2 (LogMAR 0.86 ± 0.38) (p = 0.03).
Conclusions
Revisional surgery for persistent idiopathic MH with tamponade alone had comparable anatomical closure but better VA outcomes, compared to tamponade with adjuvant manipulation.