Purpose: To compare stereopsis and foveal microstructure after internal limiting membrane peeling and inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique in patients with macular hole.
Design: Retrospective observational study.
Methods: Sixty-six patients with macular hole were included, of whom 41 underwent 25-gauge pars-plana vitrectomy with complete internal limiting membrane peeling (Peeling group) and 25 with the inverted flap technique (Inverted group). We evaluated stereopsis using the Titmus Stereo Test and the TNO stereo test, best-corrected visual acuity, macular hole closure rate, and foveal microstructure with optical coherence tomography before and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery.
Main outcome measures: Stereopsis and foveal microstructure.
Results: Preoperatively, no difference was observed in the base and minimum diameters of macular hole, Titmus Stereo Test score, TNO stereo test score, and best-corrected visual acuity between the Peeling and Inverted groups. The macular hole closure rate in the Peeling and Inverted groups were 97.6% and 100%, respectively, with no significant difference between groups. At 12 months postoperatively, Titmus Stereo Test score (2.1 ± 0.4 in the peeling and 2.2 ± 0.4 in the inverted groups), TNO stereo test score (2.3 ± 0.4 and 2.2± 0.5), and best-corrected visual acuity (0.20 ± 0.18 and 0.24 ± 0.25) were not significantly different between groups (p = 0.596, 0.332, respectively). The defect of the external limiting membrane was more common in the Inverted group than in the Peeling group at 6 months after surgery (5.4 vs. 28.0%; p < 0.05). No statistically significant inter-group differences were noted in the ellipsoid zone defect ratio throughout the follow-up period.
Conclusions: There was no difference in postoperative stereopsis nor foveal microstructure between the internal limiting membrane peeling group and the inverted group in patients with macular hole.
Copyright: © 2024 Morikawa et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.