Saratov JOURNAL of Medical and Scientific Research

Dynamics of changes of microperimetry parameters of retina by closure of macular hole with preservation of internal limiting membrane

Year: 2020, volume 16 Issue: №2 Pages: 463-467
Heading: Ophtalmology Article type: Original article
Authors: Pavlovsky О.А., Fayzrakhmanov R.R., Larina Е.А., Sukhanova A.V.
Organization: National Medical and Surgical Center n. a. N. I. Pirogov
Summary:

Objective: To evaluate the medical effectiveness of the macular hole closure (MH) technique, which is based on the limiting of the internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling. Material and Methods: The results of surgical treatment of 80 patients (80 eyes) diagnosed with MH were analyzed. Patients are divided into two groups: group 1-patients who had a standard peeling; group 2-patients who were operated on using the original method with partial peeling of the macular area. All patients underwent visometry, biomicroscopy, ophthalmoscopy, and OCT-examination. Results: By the 30th day after surgical treatment, a statistically significant excess of light sensitivity parameters was detected in the nasal part of the pattern used: the upper-nasal and lower-nasal quadrants, where peeling was not performed (p=0.032) and (p=0.034), respectively. In the 1st observation group, the recovery of the fixation point was observed during the early and late operating period and at 12 months was 58.3% (p=0.041). In group 2 patients, by the time of 1 month after surgery, the recovery of the fixation point occurred in 88.7%. Conclusion: When conducting the method of limited peeling, the ILM is preserved, which reduces the risk of intraoperative damage to the retina layers. A higher functional result was obtained in comparison with the group where the standard method was used.

Bibliography:
1. Belyi YuA, Tereshchenko AV, Shkvorchenko DO. Surgical treatment for large idiopathic macular ruptures. Practical medicine 2015; 1 (2): 119-23.
2. Balashevich LI, Baiborodov YaV, Zhogolev KS. Vitreomacular interface pathology. Review of foreign literature in questions and answers. Ophthalmosurgery 2014; (4): 109-14.
3. Shkvorchenko DO, Zakharov VD, Shpak AA, et al. Our experience with the use of platelet rich plasma in surgery macular hole. Modern technologies in ophthalmology 2016; (1): 245-6.
4. Lyskin PV, Zakharov VD, Lozinskaya OL, et al. Pathogenesis and treatment of idiopathic macular hole. Evolution of the question. Ophthalmosurgery 2010; (3): 52-55.
5. Fayzrachmanov RR, Pavlovskiy ОА, Larina ЕА. Surgical treatment of patients with untreated macular hole. Bulletin of Pirogov National Medical and Surgical Center 2019; 14 (2): 98-104.
6. Morescalchi F, Costagliola С, Gambicorti Е, et al. Controversies over the role of internal limiting membrane peeling during vitrectomy in macular hole surgery. Survey of Ophthalmology 2017; 62 (1): 58-69.
7. Gonzalez-Saldivar G, Juncal V, Chow D. Topical steroids: A non-surgical approach for recurrent macular holes. Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep 2018; (13): 93-5.
8. Fayzrahmanov RR, Pavlovskiy OA, Larina EA. The method of closureof macular holes with partial peeling of internal limiting membrane: comparative analisis. Medline.ru. 2019; 20 (17): 187-200.
9. Belyi YuA, Tereshchenko AV, Shkvorchenko DO. Surgical treatment for large idiopathic macular ruptures. Practical medicine 2015; 1 (2): 119-23.
10. Schumann RG, Yang Y, Haritoglou С, et al. Histopathology of Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling In Traction Induced Maculopathies. J Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2012; (3): 220-4.
11. Michalewska Z, Michalewski J, Dulczewska-Cichecka K, et al. Temporal inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique versus classic inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique: A Comparative Study. Retina 2015; 35 (9): 1844-50.

AttachmentSize
2020_02_463-467.pdf311.96 KB

No votes yet