medigraphic.com
SPANISH

Revista Mexicana de Oftalmología

Anales de la Sociedad Mexicana de Oftalmología y Archivos de la Asociación Para Evitar la Ceguera en México
  • Contents
  • View Archive
  • Information
    • General Information        
    • Directory
  • Publish
    • Instructions for authors        
  • medigraphic.com
    • Home
    • Journals index            
    • Register / Login
  • Mi perfil

2008, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Oftalmol 2008; 82 (4)

Resultados anatómicos y funcionales en cirugía de agujero macular

Lizana-HC, Quiroz-RMÁ, Graue-WF
Full text How to cite this article

Language: Spanish
References: 7
Page: 214-216
PDF size: 36.73 Kb.


Key words:

Macular hole, limitorrhexis.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To determine the long term results of macular hole surgery and to compare the number of macular holes closed with vitrectomy via pars plana with and without limitorrhexis.
Material and methods: Retrospective study of patients with grade 2 to 4 idiopathic macular hole, who underwent surgery with and without limitorrhexis. We reviewed general information from each patient and a complete ophthalmic examination was performed. The anatomic success was determined 3 months after surgery.
Results: Fifty nine eyes of 54 patients, 36 female and 18 male with an age range of 54 to 80 years. Six eyes had a macular hole grade 2, 15 eyes had a macular hole grade 3 and 38 grade 4. Twenty five eyes underwent surgery with limitorrhexis, resulting in closure in 19 eyes. Thirty four eyes underwent surgery without limitorrhexis, resulting in closure in 31 eyes. Nine eyes had closure failure, 7 with limitorrhexis and 2 without limitorrhexis. The postoperative visual acuity was superior to the preoperative with a p‹0.001.
Conclusions: The difference between macular hole closure with or without limitorrhexis was statistically significant in favor of vitrectomy without limitorrhexis.


REFERENCES

  1. Castro Navarro J, González-Castaño C. Macular hole surgery with and without internal limiting membrana peeling. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol 2003; 78(3): 159-164.

  2. Lee KL, Dean S, Guest S. A comparison of outcomes after indocyanine green and trypan blue assisted internal limiting membrane peeling during macular hole surgery. Br J Ophthalmol 2005; 89(4):420-4.

  3. Smiddy WE, Feur W, Cordahi G. Internal limiting membrane peeling in macular hole surgery. Ophthamology 2001; 108(8):1471-6.

  4. Park DW. Lee JH, Min WK. The use of internal limiting membrane maculorrhexis in treatment of idiopathic macular holes. Korean J Ophthalmol 1998; 12 (2):92-7.

  5. Haritoglou C, Gass CA. Long-term anatomic and visual acuity outcomes alter inicial anatomic succes with macular hole surgery. Am J Ophthalmol 2003; 135(5):633-47.

  6. Park DW, Sipperley JO, Sneed SR, Dugel PU, Jacobsen J. Macular hole surgery with internal-limiting membrane peeling and intravitreous air. Ophthalmology 1999; 106 (7):1392-7.

  7. Mester V, Kuhn F. Internal limiting membrane removal in the management of full thickness macular holes. Am J Ophthalmol 2000; 129 (6):769-77.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com

Mi perfil

C?MO CITAR (Vancouver)

Rev Mex Oftalmol. 2008;82