Macular hole surgery with and without indocyanine green assistance

Abstract

Purpose To compare the results of macular hole surgery with the use of indocyanine green (ICG) to assist internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling and macular hole surgery without indocyanine green use. Methods A retrospective, comparative, consecutive study of 68 patients with macular holes. In total, 34 patients underwent vitrectomy and ILM peeling, and 34 patients underwent vitrectomy and ILM peeling with the assistance of indocyanine green. The main outcome measures were postoperative visual acuity and macular hole status. Results Indocyanine green increased the ability to visualise and peel the ILM. The average preoperative visual acuity in the group where ICG was used was 6/36 and the group where ICG was not used was 6/60. The average follow-up was 25 weeks for the ICG group and 53 weeks for the group with no ICG. Both groups were also compared at 25 weeks follow-up. Hole closure rate for the group with ICG was 97% compared to 91% without ICG. The mean postoperative visual acuity was 6/24 for the group with ICG and 6/12 for the group without ICG, a difference of two lines on the Snellen chart when compared with the preoperative acuity (P-value 0.299, Student's t-test). Both groups had a mean improvement of Snellen acuity of two lines (ICG group: P-value 0.0002, Student's t-test; no ICG group: P-value 0.00004, Student's t-test). In all, 83% of patients in the ICG group maintained or improved their visual acuity compared to 91% in the group without ICG. Discussion There is no doubt that indocyanine green stains and assists in visualisation and therefore increases the ease of peeling the ILM in macular hole surgery. Initially, there was concern regarding a poorer outcome for patients with the use of ICG, which has also been previously discussed in the literature. When the two groups were compared at a similar follow-up time of approximately 25 weeks, it was shown that there was no statistically significant difference between the outcomes in the two groups. This study had an improved hole closure rate for the group where ICG was used, although it was not statistically significant.

Outcomes of macular hole surgery: implications for surgical management and clinical governance

“…[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24] However, there appears little doubt that in some circumstances ICG ILM peeling may be toxic to the retina with impaired acuity outcome, RPE pigmentary change and visual field defects being reported. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10]25 Factors that have been considered to be important in this toxicity include dye concentration, tonicity, contact time, and a photodynamic action associated with long wavelength endoillumination.…”

The Concentration-Dependent Effects of Indocyanine Green on Retinal Function in the Electrophysiological ex vivo Model of Isolated Perfused Vertebrate Retina

“…Clinical use of intraocular dyes for staining the internal limiting membrane (ILM) and epiretinal membranes leads to improvement in anatomical success and functional outcome after vitreomacular surgery [1,2]. The first dye applied for this indication was indocyanine green (ICG), which has been used in internal medicine for over half a century [3].…”

Intravitreal Staining of the Internal Limiting Membrane Using Indocyanine Green in the Treatment of Macular Holes

“…In contrast to those negative effects of ICG on visual improvement, recent reports demonstrated no influence of ICG-assisted ILM peeling in comparison to no staining [53, 69]. Slaughter and Lee [69] compared retrospectively 68 patients with and without ICG assistance in ILM peeling and found no difference between the two groups on the functional outcomes, although the anatomic hole closure rate was significant higher in the ICG group.…”

“…Slaughter and Lee [69] compared retrospectively 68 patients with and without ICG assistance in ILM peeling and found no difference between the two groups on the functional outcomes, although the anatomic hole closure rate was significant higher in the ICG group. Lochhead et al [53] matched retrospectively 34 patients who underwent macular surgery with ICG against 34 patients without ICG staining.…”