Fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling versus complete internal limiting membrane peeling for myopic traction maculopathy

Iwasaki, Masanori; Miyamoto, Hirotomo; Okushiba, Utako; Imaizumi, Hiroko

doi:10.1007/s10384-019-00696-1

Cited by 21 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, postoperative VA was superior in eyes with fovea-sparing ILM peeling. Similar results have been reported in two other studies (24,25), however, a recent study has argued that there was no difference in the postoperative VA between fovea-sparing and complete ILM peeling groups and that the rate of postoperative MH development was not significant (2/20 vs. 0/13; p = 0.508) (26). The potential benefit of fovea-sparing ILM peeling compared to complete ILM peeling has not been established yet and this needs to be addressed in the future.…”

Section: Myopic Choroidal Neovascularization (Cnv)supporting

confidence: 93%

Pathologic myopia: an overview of the current understanding and interventions

Ueta

Makino

Yamamoto

et al. 2020

GHM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pathologic myopia is a major cause of low vision and blindness worldwide. Its social and economic burden has been demonstrated by epidemiological studies. There have been recent advances in the classification system for myopic maculopathy that enables clinicians to describe different types of lesions, including tessellated fundus, diffuse/patchy chorioretinal atrophy, macular atrophy, lacquer cracks, choroidal neovascularization (CNV), and Fuchs' spot, in a standardized format. From a therapeutic point of view, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy has been established as first-line choice for myopic CNV. For myopic retinoschisis and macular holes with/without retinal detachment, pars plana vitrectomy has been generally accepted as an efficient strategy. Studies are being conducted to determine how to avoid the development of a postoperative macular hole and to improve the quality of vision after surgery. In recent years, studies have revealed preventive measures that can be taken against myopia progression, including low-dose atropine eyedrops and contact lens wearing with peripheral myopic defocusing.

show abstract

Section: Myopic Choroidal Neovascularization (Cnv)supporting

confidence: 93%

Pathologic myopia: an overview of the current understanding and interventions

Ueta

Makino

Yamamoto

et al. 2020

GHM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By screening titles and abstracts, 20 studies were excluded. Finally, six studies [16][17][18][19][20]23 in English were eligible for this meta-analysis by assessing full text (Figure 1). Non-randomized and retrospective studies were included.…”

Section: Search Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The visual improvement standard was change of logMAR of more than 0.2. 16,18,19 The authors shared a consensus view that anatomic success meant the disappearance of myopic foveoschisis. [18][19][20] The secondary parameters were the rate of postoperative complications.…”

Section: Data Extraction and Quality Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…16,18,19 The authors shared a consensus view that anatomic success meant the disappearance of myopic foveoschisis. [18][19][20] The secondary parameters were the rate of postoperative complications. All studies were assessed by Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) containing 12 items with the highest scores of 24.…”

Section: Data Extraction and Quality Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Vitrectomy with fovea-sparing ILM peeling versus total ILM peeling for myopic traction maculopathy: A meta-analysis

Luan

2020

European Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To evaluate the effect and safety of fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling (FSIP) for myopic traction maculopathy comparing with that of total ILM peeling (TP). Methods: PubMed, Web of science, Embase, Cochrane, EBSCO and CNKI, published until January 2020, were searched. Postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), postoperative central foveal thickness (CFT), the rate of visual improvement and anatomic success were the main outcome parameters, and the secondary outcome parameters were postoperative complications. Random-effects models were chosen in regard with multi-studies. Standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) and odds ratio (OR) were applied as effect sizes of continuous and binomial data, respectively. Results: Six comparative studies involving 193 eyes were included. Better postoperative BCVA was detected in the FSIP group (SMD = −0.39, 95%CI: −0.69 to −0.09, p = 0.01). The FSIP group had a higher rate of vision improvement with statistical significance (OR = 3.86, 95%CI: 1.36 to 10.97, p = 0.01). Both surgical methods had similar outcomes for postoperative CFT (SMD = 0.07, 95%CI: −0.27 to 0.40, p = 0.70). The FSIP group had a higher rate of anatomic success, though there was no obvious significance (OR = 2.54, 95%CI: 0.96 to 6.74, p = 0.06). For the development of postoperative full-thickness macular hole (FTMH), the rate was lower in the FSIP group (OR = 0.18, 95%CI: 0.05 to 0.64, p = 0.008). Conclusion: Vitrectomy with fovea-sparing ILM peeling for myopic traction maculopathy could gain better visual outcomes and decrease incidence of FTMH development, though there was no obvious difference in postoperative CFT and the rate of anatomic success between two groups.

show abstract

“…4 Recently, the use of a foveal-sparing ILM peeling has been proposed to treat MTM and reduce the risk of iatrogenic FTMH. 15–17…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proposal for the management of myopic traction maculopathy based on the new MTM staging system

Parolini¹,

Palmieri²,

Finzi

et al. 2020

European Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To propose the Myopic Traction Maculopathy (MTM) management Table, based on the MTM Staging System (MSS). Methods: A retrospective review of 157 eyes affected by MTM, operated with pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), or macular buckle (MB) or combined surgery (MB + PPV). Each case was classified according to the MSS. Anatomical results were evaluated with OCT at an intermediate follow-up (3–6 months) and at a final follow-up (2–8 years), considering changes both in the foveal and in the retinal pattern. The number and type of operations needed were noted. The surgical complications were reported. Results: Primary surgery was MB for 83 eyes (52%), PPV for 36 (23%) and MB + PPV for 38 (24%). At intermediate follow-up, the retinal pattern was restored in 55.41% and foveal in 42.68%. Further surgery was indicated as PPV in 25.48%, MB in 14.65%. At the final follow-up, the retinal pattern was restored in 96.16% and the foveal pattern in 87.90%. BCVA improved at the final follow-up ( p < 0.05). The complications of MB were not sight-threatening. The complications of PPV were FTMH in 67% cases in stages 2, 3, and 4. Cataract developed in 60% of phakic eyes. The complications of combined MB+PPV were cataract (56%) and PVR (5%). Conclusions: Both PPV and MB may be used to treat MTM. PPV addresses the changes in the foveal pattern while MB addresses the changes in the retinal pattern. The MTM management table offers a proposal for the choice of type and timing of treatment customized per each stage of MTM.

show abstract

Fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling versus complete internal limiting membrane peeling for myopic traction maculopathy

Cited by 21 publications

References 28 publications

Pathologic myopia: an overview of the current understanding and interventions

Pathologic myopia: an overview of the current understanding and interventions

Vitrectomy with fovea-sparing ILM peeling versus total ILM peeling for myopic traction maculopathy: A meta-analysis

Proposal for the management of myopic traction maculopathy based on the new MTM staging system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About