September 2016
Volume 57, Issue 12
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2016
Concurrent Inner Limiting Membrane Peeling During Epiretinal Membrane Surgery: Effects on Outcomes and Recurrence
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Logan Christensen
    Ophthalmology, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado, United States
  • Jeffrey Olson
    Ophthalmology, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Logan Christensen, None; Jeffrey Olson, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science September 2016, Vol.57, 1056. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to Subscribers Only
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Logan Christensen, Jeffrey Olson; Concurrent Inner Limiting Membrane Peeling During Epiretinal Membrane Surgery: Effects on Outcomes and Recurrence. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2016;57(12):1056.

      Download citation file:


      © 2017 Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology.

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Epiretinal membranes (ERMs) are a common macular pathology leading to decreased visual acuity and metamorphopsia. Inner limiting membrane (ILM) removal at the time of ERM removal has gained popularity over the last decade. Some studies have reported improved outcomes with concurrent ILM removal while others have not. The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes from the two surgical techniques in a single-surgeon academic setting.

Methods : Retrospective chart review of 32 patients that had ERM removal by a single surgeon at the University of Colorado Eye Institute from 2/2008 to 12/2014 was conducted. Patients were divided into two groups based on whether ILM was concurrently peeled or not. Primary outcome was ERM recurrence as seen on post-operative Ocular Coherence Tomography (OCT). Secondary outcome was the maintenance of foveal contour.

Results : There was no difference in recurrence rate found between the ERM-only and ERM/ILM groups (15% vs. 21%, p=1), no difference in pre- or 6, 12 month post-op Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) (p=0.734, 0.25, 0.98), and no difference in complication rate or post-operative OCT central macular thickness improvement (p=1, 0.42). The ERM-only group had a statistically significant higher percentage of maintenance or regaining of foveal contour vs. the MP/ILM peel group (61.5% vs. 21%, p=0.03).

Conclusions : There was no difference between the two groups for recurrence rate, complications, final vision, or OCT central macular thickness improvement. The ERM-only group had an improved rate of maintenance or regaining of foveal contour.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2016 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, Wash., May 1-5, 2016.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×