April 2014
Volume 55, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2014
Effect of internal limiting membrane peeling adjunct to vitrectomy for macular edema: systematic review of literature and meta-analysis
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Takuya Nakajima
    Ophthalmology, University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Hongo, Japan
  • Takashi Ueta
    Ophthalmology, University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Hongo, Japan
  • Yasuo Noda
    Ophthalmology, University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Hongo, Japan
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Takuya Nakajima, None; Takashi Ueta, None; Yasuo Noda, None
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2014, Vol.55, 1146. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Takuya Nakajima, Takashi Ueta, Yasuo Noda; Effect of internal limiting membrane peeling adjunct to vitrectomy for macular edema: systematic review of literature and meta-analysis. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2014;55(13):1146.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling adjunct to vitrectomy for macular edema due to diabetic retinopathy (DMR) or retinal vein occlusion (RVO)

Methods: Literature in Medline and Cochrane central register of controlled trials was systematically reviewed. Eligible studies were published retrospective or prospective studies comparing vitrectomy and vitrectomy with ILM peeling for DMR or RVO with no language restriction. Preoperative and postoperative logMAR visual acuity (VA), foveal thickness, and improvement in logMAR improvement were compared between vitrecomy (ILM on group) and vitrectomy with ILM peeling (ILM off group). Meta-analysis was conducted in fixed effects due to small heterogeneity among the included studies

Results: Seven studies with 478 patients were included for analysis. Five and two studies were on DMR and RVO, respectively. A DMR study was prospective randomized trial and a DMR study was prospective case series. The other five were retrospective studies. At baseline, VA of ILM on group patients tended to be better than patients of ILM off group (mean difference; 0.04, 95%CI; -0.03-0.11, p=0.23). After 6 months, there was no difference in VA between the two groups (mean difference; 0.00, 95%CI;-0.06-0.05, p=0.89). Based on four studies with 212 patients that published improvement in VA change, VA tended to improve more in ILM on group than ILM off group (mean difference; 0.05, 95% CI; -0.14-0.03, p=0.21). There mean difference in preoperative (21.59 µm, 95%CI; -19.50-62.68,p=0.30) and postoperative (27.58 µm, 95%CI; -17.35-72.51, p=0.23) foveal thickness was similar between ILM on and ILM off groups

Conclusions: This meta-analysis showed almost the same surgical results between vitrectomy only and vitrectomy with ILM peeling. However, the paucity of prospective randomized study warrants the necessity of more evaluation in the future

Keywords: 762 vitreoretinal surgery  
×
×

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.

×