May 2008
Volume 49, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2008
Comparison of Macular Hole Repair With and Without Prone Positioning
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • J. Heffez
    Vitreoretinal Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
  • A. C. Kopel
    Vitreoretinal Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
  • P. E. Carvounis
    Vitreoretinal Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
    Ophthalmology, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas
  • E. R. Holz
    Vitreoretinal Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  J. Heffez, None; A.C. Kopel, None; P.E. Carvounis, None; E.R. Holz, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2008, Vol.49, 4701. doi:https://doi.org/
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      J. Heffez, A. C. Kopel, P. E. Carvounis, E. R. Holz; Comparison of Macular Hole Repair With and Without Prone Positioning. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2008;49(13):4701. doi: https://doi.org/.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : To compare the anatomic outcomes of pars plana vitrectomy using perfluoropropane with and without postoperative prone positioning for repair of macular holes.

Methods: : Retrospective chart review of 57 consecutive patients who underwent pars plana vitrectomy by a single surgeon for repair of stage 2-4 macular holes using perfluoropropane with (n=37) and without postoperative prone positioning (n=20) and at least 2 months follow-up. No patient underwent postoperative augmentation of the gas bubble.

Results: : The overall closure rate was 84.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 73%-92%). There was no statistically significant difference (p=0.25, Fisher Exact Test) between patients who maintained postoperative prone positioning (89%, 95% CI: 75-96%) and those who did not (75%, 95% CI: 53-89%). The closure rate was similar in pseudophakic (including eyes that underwent combined phacovitrectomy) and phakic eyes among patients who did not position (p=0.99). The 2 groups had no significant difference in the distribution of macular hole stage (p=0.74, Fisher Exact Test), however, internal limiting membrane peeling was performed more frequently in the prone positioning group (p=0.05, Fisher Exact Test).

Conclusions: : In our study, macular hole closure rates were not significantly different in two groups of patients with and without prone positioning.

Keywords: macular holes • 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.

×