July 2018
Volume 59, Issue 9
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   July 2018
Macular Buckling Versus Vitrectomy for Myopic Macular Schisis and associated macular Detachment
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Lin Lu
    Retina, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
  • Bingqian Liu
    Retina, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
  • Yonghao Li
    Retina, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
  • Wei Ma
    Retina, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
  • Xiling Yu
    Retina, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Lin Lu, None; Bingqian Liu, None; Yonghao Li, None; Wei Ma, None; Xiling Yu, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  National Natural Science Foundation of China (81371019), Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (2014A030313197), Guangzhou Science and Technology Project (3030901006039)
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science July 2018, Vol.59, 869. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Lin Lu, Bingqian Liu, Yonghao Li, Wei Ma, Xiling Yu; Macular Buckling Versus Vitrectomy for Myopic Macular Schisis and associated macular Detachment. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2018;59(9):869.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : To compare the efficacy of macular buckling and vitrectomy on myopic macular schisis and associated macular detachment.

Methods : This is a prospective, randomized, open label, clinical trial. We randomly assigned highly myopic eyes showing macular schisis and macular detachment without full-thickness macular hole (FTMH) to surgical intervention of either macular buckling or vitrectomy. Macular buckling plus intravitreal C3F8 gas injection was performed in the buckling group. Small gauge vitrectomy, internal limiting membrane peeling, and C3F8 gas tamponade was performed in the vitrectomy group. Outcome measurements included FTMH development, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improvement, and surgical failure rate. Surgical adverse events were recorded.

Results : A total of 85 eyes from 85 patients were assigned to one of the two groups. 80 patients were included, with 41 received buckling, and 39 eyes received vitrectomy. The mean age, refractive error, axial length, and baseline BCVA was not statistically different between the two groups. After surgery, the patients were followed for 12 months. FTMH development was observed in 11/39 (28.2%) eyes of vitrectomy group and no eye of buckling group (P<0.01). Seven eyes in vitrectomy group were determined as surgical failure due to FTMH development and macular detachment and required a second surgery. Subfoveal liquid sustained over 3 months was observed in 62.5% of buckling group and 41% of vitrectomy group. At 12 months, the mean improvement in BCVA (ETDRS) was greater in the buckling group (+20.4 letters) than in the vitrectomy group (+9.5 letters). Adverse events of buckling group included transient ocular pain (16/40), asymptomatic abduction limitation (19/41), metamophopsia (13/41), intraocular hemorrhage (3/41), implant exposure (2/41), esotropia (2/41). Cataract was observed in 11/39 eyes of vitrectomy group.

Conclusions : Macular buckling was more effective for myopic macular schisis and concurrent macular detachment, which achieved more visual improvement, meanwhile prevented vitrectomy related complications of FTMH and cataract development.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2018 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Honolulu, Hawaii, April 29 - May 3, 2018.

×
×

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.

×