Comparison of the inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique without versus with an autologous blood clot for treating macular hole-associated retinal detachment
2025

Comparing Techniques for Treating Macular Holes in Retinal Detachment

Sample size: 80 publication 10 minutes Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Zhu Ke, Wang Yingchao, Lei Boya, Chen Ling, Zhang Yanqiong, Chang Qing, Xu Gezhi, Ni Yingqin

Primary Institution: Eye Institute and Department of Ophthalmology, Eye and Ear Nose, Throat Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, China

Hypothesis

Does the inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique with an autologous blood clot provide better outcomes than without it for treating macular hole-associated retinal detachment?

Conclusion

The inverted ILM flap technique alone resulted in better foveal configurations and visual outcomes than the ILM flap technique combined with ABC in patients with MHRD.

Supporting Evidence

  • The MH closure rates after initial surgery were similar in both groups.
  • The postoperative improvement in BCVA was significantly better in the ILM flap group.
  • Preoperative BCVA was positively associated with postoperative improvement in BCVA.

Takeaway

Doctors compared two ways to fix a hole in the eye caused by a detachment. One way used a special flap, and the other added a blood clot. The flap alone worked better for seeing clearly afterward.

Methodology

This retrospective observational study included 80 eyes with MHRD that underwent vitrectomy with ILM flap without (46 eyes) or with ABC (34 eyes).

Potential Biases

The use of ABC was not randomly selected, which may introduce bias.

Limitations

The follow-up period was probably too short to observe full recovery of the foveal microstructures, and the study was retrospective without random selection of ABC.

Participant Demographics

The study included 20 males and 59 females, aged 18–75 years.

Statistical Information

P-Value

0.027

Confidence Interval

95% CI: 0.456 to 0.820

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1186/s40662-024-00417-x

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication