Efficiency comparison with fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling and complete internal limiting membrane peeling for treating myopic traction maculopathy
| Autor: | Wenjuan Lv, Ji-Ze Jiang, Yun Xiao, Yong-Xin Gu, Leibing Ji, Wen-Jian Xin |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2021 |
| Předmět: |
Pars plana
medicine.medical_specialty Fovea Centralis genetic structures medicine.medical_treatment Visual Acuity Vitrectomy Basement Membrane Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience Macular Degeneration Traction Ophthalmology medicine Humans Retrospective Studies business.industry Internal limiting membrane Fovea centralis Epiretinal Membrane Traction (orthopedics) medicine.disease eye diseases Sensory Systems medicine.anatomical_structure Effusion Efficiency comparison Myopia Degenerative Maculopathy sense organs business Tomography Optical Coherence |
| Zdroj: | Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie. 260(1) |
| ISSN: | 1435-702X |
| Popis: | PURPOSE To explore whether the efficacy of fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling (FS-ILMP) is better than that of complete internal limiting membrane peeling (ILMP). METHODS This retrospective clinical study included 34 cases (34 eyes) with myopic traction maculopathy collected from June 2017 to February 2019. Twenty-three-gauge (23-G) pars plana vitrectomy (23G PPV) was performed on all patients. In the FS-ILMP group, 18 eyes retained the internal limiting membrane (ILM) of about 1 to 1.5 papillary diameter centered on fovea centralis, while in the standard ILMP group, the ILM was completely removed from 16 eyes. The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central foveal thickness (CFT), and other indexes were collected before and 6 months after surgery. RESULTS There was no significant difference in baseline clinical characteristics between the two groups. CFT and BCVA were significantly improved in both FS-ILMP and standard ILMP group, but the postoperative BCVA of the FS-ILMP group was significantly better than that of the standard ILMP group (P |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full text from SpringerLink