首页> 外文期刊>Clinical ophthalmology >Comparison of Three Different Techniques of Inverted Internal Limiting Membrane Flap in Treatment of Large Idiopathic Full-Thickness Macular Hole
【24h】

Comparison of Three Different Techniques of Inverted Internal Limiting Membrane Flap in Treatment of Large Idiopathic Full-Thickness Macular Hole

机译:倒置内部限制膜皮瓣三种不同技术的比较治疗大特发性全厚黄斑孔

获取原文
           

摘要

Purpose: To evaluate and compare three different techniques of inverted internal limiting membrane (ILM) flap in the treatment of large idiopathic full-thickness macular hole. Methods: In a comparative interventional case series, 72 eyes from 72 patients with large ( 400 μm) full-thickness macular hole were randomly enrolled into three different groups: group A – hemicircular ILM peel with temporally hinged inverted flap; group B – circular ILM peel with temporally hinged inverted flap; and group C – circular ILM peel with superior inverted flap. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), anatomical closure rate, and ellipsoid zone (EZ) or external limiting membrane (ELM) defects were evaluated preoperatively, at week 1, and months 1, 3 and 6 after surgery. Results: There were 24 eyes in group A, 23 in group B, and 25 in group C. In all three groups, larger diameter macular hole was associated with worse preoperative visual acuity (r=0.625, P0.001). Mean BCVA improved significantly in all three groups 6 months after surgery (0.91vs 0.55, p0.001). 6 months after surgery, mean BCVA improved from 0.91 logMAR to 0.52±0.06 in group A, 0.90 to 0.53±0.06 in group B, and 0.91 to 0.55±0.11 in group C. In group A vs. B vs. C, improvement of BCVA was 0.380±0.04 vs. 0.383±0.04 vs. 0.368±0.11 logMAR, with no statistically significant difference between groups (P=0.660). The rate of successful hole closure was 87.5% vs. 91.3% vs. 100%. Although the closure rate was 100% in Group C (circular ILM peel with superiorly hinged inverted flap), this difference was not statistically significant (P=0.115). Conclusion: ILM peel with an inverted flap is a highly effective procedure for the treatment of large, full-thickness macular hole. Different flap techniques have comparable results, indicating that the technique can be chosen based on surgeon preference.
机译:目的:评估和比较倒置内部限制膜(ILM)皮瓣的三种不同技术在治疗大学性患者全厚斑孔孔中。方法:在比较介入案例系列中,72只大(>400μm)全厚的黄斑孔的72只眼睛被随机注册到三种不同的组:A - Hemicircular ILM剥离,具有时间上铰接倒置襟翼; B组 - 圆形ILM剥离,暂时铰接倒置襟翼;和C - 圆形ILM剥离,具有优质倒置襟翼。在手术后第1周和第1周,第1周和第1周,评估最佳校正的视力(BCVA),解剖闭合速率和椭圆形或椭圆形膜(EZ)或外部限制膜(ELM)缺陷。结果:B组,B组23只眼睛,23族,25次在C组中。在所有三组中,较大直径的黄斑孔与较差的术前视力有关(r = 0.625,p <0.001)。平均BCVA在手术后6个月内在所有三组中显着改善(0.91Vs 0.55,P <0.001)。手术后6个月,平均BCVA从0.91 logmar改善,在B组,0.90至0.53±0.06的0.90至0.53±0.06,C组中的0.91至0.55±0.11.在A组Vs. B与C组中,改善BCVA为0.380±0.04与0.383±0.04与0.368±0.11 Logmar,在组之间没有统计学显着差异(P = 0.660)。成功孔闭合率为87.5%vs.91.3%vs.100%。虽然C组(圆形ILM剥离具有优于铰接倒置瓣的圆形ILM剥离),但这种差异在统计学上没有统计学意义(P = 0.115)。结论:ILM剥离具有倒置的襟翼,是一种高效的方法,用于治疗大型全厚的黄斑孔。不同的襟翼技术具有可比的结果,表明可以基于外科医生偏好选择该技术。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号