Papillomacular bundle sparing versus conventional internal limiting membrane peeling for idiopathic macular hole 400 m

Indian journal of ophthalmology(2023)

Cited 1|Views6
No score
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the outcomes of papillomacular bundle (PMB) sparing internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling (group LP) and conventional ILM peeling (group CP) for treatment of idiopathic macular hole (MH) of <= 400 mu m. Methods: Fifteen eyes were included in each group. In group CP, conventional 360 degrees peeling was done, while in group LP, ILM was spared over PMB. The changes in peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (pRNFL) thickness and ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer (GC-IPL) thickness were analyzed at 3 months. Results: MH was closed in all with comparable visual improvement. Postoperatively, retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) was significantly thinner in the temporal quadrant in group CP. GC-IPL was significantly thinner in the temporal quadrants in group LP, whereas it was comparable in group CP. Conclusion: PMB sparing ILM peeling is comparable to conventional ILM peeling in terms of closure rate and visual gain, with the advantage of less retinal damage at 3 months.
More
Translated text
Key words
Ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer,ILM peeling,internal limiting membrane,macular hole,papillomacular bundle sparing ILM peeling,retinal nerve fiber layer,surgery
AI Read Science
Must-Reading Tree
Example
Generate MRT to find the research sequence of this paper
Chat Paper
Summary is being generated by the instructions you defined