Short-Term Clinical Results After ILM Removal and Inverted ILM Flap for Macular Hole Repair – A Single-Center Retrospective Experience

References

• Kelly NE, Wendel RT. Vitreous surgery for idiopathic macular holes. Results of a pilot study. Arch Ophthalmol. 1991;109(5):654–659. doi:10.1001/archopht.1991.01080050068031
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Robles-Holmes HK, Staropoli PC, Yannuzzi N, Sridhar J. Management of large or recurrent macular holes. Curr Ophthalmol Rep. 2020;8(2):62–68. doi:10.1007/s40135-020-00231-3
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kumagai K, Furukawa M, Ogino N, Uemura A, Larson E. Long-term outcomes of internal limiting membrane peeling with and without indocyanine green in macular hole surgery. Retina. 2006;26(6):613–617. doi:10.1097/01.iae.0000236471.79066.fe
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheidow TG, Blinder KJ, Holekamp N, et al. Outcome results in macular hole surgery: an evaluation of internal limiting membrane peeling with and without indocyanine green. Ophthalmology. 2003;110(9):1697–1701. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(03)00562-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korobelnik JF, Hannouche D, Belayachi N, Branger M, Guez JE, Hoang-Xuan T. Autologous platelet concentrate as an adjunct in macular hole healing: a pilot study. Ophthalmology. 1996;103(4):590–594. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(96)30648-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paques M, Chastang C, Mathis A, et al. Effect of autologous platelet concentrate in surgery for idiopathic macular hole: results of a multicenter, double-masked, randomized trial. Platelets in Macular Hole Surgery Group. Ophthalmology. 1999;106(5):932–938. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(99)00512-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen UC. Value of internal limiting membrane peeling in surgery for idiopathic macular hole and the correlation between function and retinal morphology. Acta Ophthalmol. 2009;87(2):1–23. doi:10.1111/j.1755-3768.2009.01777.x
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Spiteri Cornish K, Lois N, Scott N, et al. Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling versus vitrectomy with no peeling for idiopathic full-thickness macular hole (FTMH). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;6:CD009306.
   Google Scholar
• Ben Simon GJ, Desatnik H, Alhalel A, Treister G, Moisseiev J. Retrospective analysis of vitrectomy with and without internal limiting membrane peeling for stage 3 and 4 macular hole. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2004;35(2):109–115. doi:10.3928/1542-8877-20040301-05
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Michalewska Z, Michalewski J, Dulczewska-Cichecka K, Nawrocki J. Inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique for surgical repair of myopic macular holes. Retina. 2014;34(4):664–669. doi:10.1097/IAE.0000000000000042
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michalewska Z, Michalewski J, Dulczewska-Cichecka K, Adelman RA, Nawrocki J. Temporal inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique versus classic inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique: a comparative study. Retina. 2015;35(9):1844–1850. doi:10.1097/IAE.0000000000000555
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michalewska Z, Michalewski J, Adelman RA, Nawrocki J. Inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique for large macular holes. Ophthalmology. 2010;117(10):2018–2025. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.02.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Velez-Montoya R, Ramirez-Estudillo JA, Sjoholm-Gomez de Liano C, et al. Inverted ILM flap, free ILM flap and conventional ILM peeling for large macular holes. Int J Retina Vitreous. 2018;4:8. doi:10.1186/s40942-018-0111-5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kim SH, Kim HK, Yang JY, Lee SC, Kim SS, Korean J. Visual recovery after macular hole surgery and related prognostic factors. Ophthalmol. 2018;32(2):140–146.
   Google Scholar
• Gu C, Qiu Q. Inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique for large macular holes: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2018;256(6):1041–1049. doi:10.1007/s00417-018-3956-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marques RE, Sousa DC, Leal I, Faria MY, Marques-Neves C. Complete ILM peeling versus inverted flap technique for macular hole surgery: a meta-analysis. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2020;51(3):187–A2. doi:10.3928/23258160-20200228-08
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silva N, Ferreira A, Nawrocka Vel Michalewska ZA, Meireles A. Inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique: is it the best option for macular holes? Clin Ophthalmol. 2021;15:3295–3303. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S284614
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duker JS, Kaiser PK, Binder S, et al. The international vitreomacular traction study group classification of vitreomacular adhesion, traction, and macular hole. Ophthalmology. 2013;120(12):2611–2619. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.07.042
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S, Sturdivant RX. Applied Logistic Regression. John Wiley & Sons; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Muselier A, Dugas B, Burelle X, et al. Macular hole surgery and cataract extraction: combined vs consecutive surgery. Am J Ophthalmol. 2010;150(3):387–391. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2010.04.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Theocharis IP, Alexandridou A, Gili NJ, Tomic Z. Combined phacoemulsification and pars plana vitrectomy for macular hole treatment. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2005;83(2):172–175. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0420.2005.00417.x
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Thompson JT, Glaser BM, Sjaarda RN, Murphy RP. Progression of nuclear sclerosis and long-term visual results of vitrectomy with transforming growth factor beta-2 for macular holes. Am J Ophthalmol. 1995;119(1):48–54. doi:10.1016/S0002-9394(14)73812-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elhusseiny AM, Schwartz SG, Flynn HW, Smiddy WE. Long-term outcomes after macular hole surgery. Ophthalmol Retina. 2020;4(4):369–376. doi:10.1016/j.oret.2019.09.015
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kanda K, Nakashima H, Emi K. Macular pucker formation after inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique: two case reports. Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep. 2022;25:101282. doi:10.1016/j.ajoc.2022.101282
   PubMedGoogle Scholar