Fovea sparing versus complete internal limiting membrane peeling for myopic traction maculopathy: a meta-analysis

Lamellar macular hole in highly myopic eyes and insights into its development, evolution, and treatment: a mini-review

Lamellar macular holes (LMHs) are a manifestation of myopic tractional maculopathy (MTM). Owing to the complex and multidirectional traction force in the elongated eyeball, the clinical features, development, evolution, and treatment algorithms of LMH in highly myopic eyes may differ from those of idiopathic LMH or MTM in general. This review aimed to specifically explore the LMHs in highly myopic eyes. Several developmental processes of LMH and their association with macular retinoschisis have been demonstrated, with the tractional component identified in all processes. Epiretinal proliferation was more prevalent and more extensive in LMHs in highly myopic eyes than in idiopathic LMHs. LMHs in highly myopic eyes may remain stable or progress to foveal detachment and full-thickness macular hole with or without retinal detachment. The predictive factors associated with disease progression were summarized to facilitate monitoring and guide surgical intervention. The treatment of LMHs in highly myopic eyes was based on an algorithm for treating myopic tractional maculopathy, including gas tamponade, pars plana vitrectomy, macular buckling, and a combination of vitrectomy and macular buckling. New internal limiting membrane (ILM) manipulation techniques such as fovea-sparing ILM peeling or fovea-sparing ILM peeling combined with ILM flap insertion could reduce the risk of developing iatrogenic full-thickness macular holes postoperatively. Further research should focus on the treatment of LMH in highly myopic eyes.

Novel surgical approaches for treating myopic traction maculopathy: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Myopic traction maculopathy (MTM) is a complication of pathological myopia and encompasses various pathological conditions caused by tractional changes in the eye. These changes include retinoschisis, foveal retinal detachment, and lamellar or full-thickness macular holes (FTMHs). This meta-analysis evaluated the safety and efficacy of novel surgical for treating MTM.

METHODS

To compare the outcomes of different surgical approaches for MTM, multiple databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Meta-Register of Controlled Trials, were comprehensively searched. The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1.

RESULTS

Nine comparative studies involving 350 eyes were included in this meta-analysis. There were significant differences between fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling (FSIP) and standard internal limiting membrane peeling (ILMP). Preoperative best-corrected visual acuity BCVA (standard mean difference (SMD): -0.10, 95% CI: -0.32 to 0.12) and central foveal thickness CFT (SMD: 0.05, 95% CI: -0.22 to 0.33) were not significantly different (p = 0.39 and p = 0.71, respectively). However, the postoperative BCVA improved significantly (SMD = - 0.47, 95% CI: - 0.80, - 0.14, p = 0.006) in the FSIP group compared to the standard ILMP group. Postoperative CFT did not differ significantly between the two groups (p = 0.62). The FSIP group had a greater anatomical success rate than the other groups, although the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.26). The incidence of postoperative macular hole formation was significantly lower (OR = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.07-0.54; p = 0.05) in the FSIP group than in the standard ILMP group. The unique characteristics of highly myopic eyes, such as increased axial length and structural changes, may have contributed to the greater incidence of FTMH in the ILMP group.

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings of this meta-analysis, FSIP is the initial surgical approach for early-stage MTM and has shown promising outcomes. However, to establish the safest and most efficient surgical technique for treating different MTM stages, further comparative studies, specifically those focusing on ILMP and FSIP, are necessary.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Retrospectively registered.

Fovea-sparing internal limiting membrane peeling with inverted flap technique versus standard internal limiting membrane peeling for symptomatic myopic foveoschisis

To study the long-term outcomes of standard ILM peeling and fovea sparing with inverted flap (FSIF) peeling for symptomatic myopic foveoschisis (MF). This retrospective observational study included 36 eyes of 34 consecutive patients who underwent vitrectomy with standard ILM peeling and FSIF peeling for MF between April 2012 and march 2020. The primary outcome measures included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central foveal thickness (CFT) at 1 month and final visit and postoperative development of macular hole. There were 14 eyes in the standard ILM peeling group and 22 eyes and in the FSIF peeling groups with a mean FU of 34.2 months (SD 23.3; min. 12-max. 96) and 27.7 months (SD 14.9; min. 12-max. 63), respectively. In both groups BCVA was not significantly improved at 1 month but improved at last visit from 0.55 ± 0.21 to 0.37 ± 0.29 in the standard ILM peeling group (P = 0.0154) and from 0.57 ± 0.27 to 0.28 ± 0.23 in the FSIF peeling group (P < 0.0001). At 1 month and final visit CMT decreased from 572 ± 183.5 µm to 277.5 ± 95.2 µm and to 250.4 ± 96.1 µm, respectively, in the standard ILM peeling group and from 589.9 ± 189.8 µm to 383 ± 110.1 µm and 162.3 ± 74.8 µm in the FSIF peeling group (P < 0.001 for both groups at both time-points). The preoperative and postoperative BCVA and CMT showed no significant differences between groups. Three of the eyes in the standard ILM peeling group developed postoperative macular hole at 1, 10, 24 months, respectively, and none of the eyes in the FSIF peeling group. Multivariate analysis revealed that a better BCVA was the only independent factor correlated with the final BCVA. In this study, standard ILM peeling and FSIF peeling were both beneficial in improving the anatomy and function of eyes with MF. Postoperative MH may occur up to 2 years after standard peeling and seem effectively prevented by FSIF peeling.

PEELING AND INTERNAL LIMITING MEMBRANE REPOSITION (PAIR) FOR MYOPIC FOVEOSCHISIS

PURPOSE

To report the outcomes of the Peeling and Internal Limiting Membrane Reposition (PAIR) technique in myopic foveoschisis.

METHODS

A retrospective case series of eyes with myopic foveoschisis that underwent vitrectomy and PAIR. Visual acuity, fundus photographs, and optical coherence tomography measurements were obtained and analyzed. Data are presented as medians (ranges).

RESULTS

A total of seven eyes underwent PAIR and were followed up for 339 days (188-436 days). No intraoperative complications were noted. One eye exhibited postoperative macular hole formation, but the hole was healed through fluid-gas exchange. At the last follow-up, the visual acuity had improved from 20/66 (20/332-20/40) to 20/40 (20/100-20/25), and the central foveal thickness had decreased from 576 µ m to 269 µ m. A repositioned internal limiting membrane (ILM) was observed in six of the eyes, and inner retinal dimples were noted in only two eyes. However, retinal wrinkles under the repositioned or perifoveal ILM were noted in five eyes.

CONCLUSION

The PAIR technique relieved traction, restored the ILM, and achieved functional and morphological improvement in eyes with myopic foveoschisis. Limited occurrence of inner retinal dimples and retinal thinning was noted, but retinal wrinkles occurred, likely due to ILM contracture.

Risk Factors and Outcomes of Postoperative Macular Hole Formation after Vitrectomy for Myopic Traction Maculopathy: SCHISIS Report No. 2

PURPOSE

To evaluate the incidence, pathogenesis, risk factors, and treatment outcomes of postoperative macular hole (MH) after pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for myopic traction maculopathy (MTM).

DESIGN

Multicenter, interventional, retrospective case series.

SUBJECTS

Consecutive eyes that underwent PPV for MTM with a minimum 6-month follow-up.

METHODS

We investigated the characteristics and treatment outcomes of postoperative MH after MTM surgery.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Incidence, risk factors, and anatomic and visual outcomes of postoperative MH.

RESULTS

We included 207 eyes (207 patients) with a mean follow-up of 25.9 months. During follow-up, 24 (11.6%) eyes developed MH (10 with concurrent MH retinal detachment); 15 eyes within 30 days (early), 4 eyes between 31 and 180 days (intermediate), and 5 eyes after 180 days (late). Logistic regression analysis revealed male gender (odds ratio [OR], 2.917; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.198-7.100; P = 0.018), thinner preoperative choroidal thickness (OR, 0.988; 95% CI, 0.976-1.000; P = 0.048), and use of indocyanine green for internal limiting membrane peeling (OR, 2.960; 95% CI, 1.172-7.476; P = 0.022) as significant risk factors for postoperative MH. Internal limiting membrane peeling with a fovea-sparing technique tended to protect against postoperative MH, but it was not statistically significant (P = 0.096), because 1 eye still developed MH. Postoperative MHs were treated by observation (6 eyes), in-office octafluoropropane (C3F8) gas injection (7 eyes), or PPV (11 eyes). Macular hole closure was achieved in 20 eyes (83%). The hole closure rate was 67% (4/6 eyes) after observation, 71% (5/7 eyes) after C3F8 gas injection, and 91% (10/11 eyes) after PPV. However, visual outcomes were significantly worse for eyes with postoperative MH than those without (0.38 ± 0.43 vs. 0.68 ± 0.46; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative MH may occur in 11.6% of patients with MTM at any time after surgery. Retreatment resulted in relatively favorable anatomic closure but unfavorable visual outcomes.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Myopic Traction Maculopathy in Low Myopia

We describe a case of myopic traction maculopathy (MTM) in a patient with low myopia that resolved with surgical intervention. Our patient demonstrated no other features of myopic degeneration and none of the typical tractional elements that cause MTM, such as vitreomacular traction due to partial posterior vitreous detachment (PVD) with vitreomacular adhesion, epiretinal membrane, or a remnant cortical vitreous layer following PVD. Possible pathogenic mechanisms in our patient include reduced compliance of the aging internal limiting membrane and/or traction from elasticity within the thin cortical vitreous layer that forms the posterior wall of the premacular liquefied pocket. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina 2023;54:481-484.].