Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling versus inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique for macular hole-induced retinal detachment: a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis

• Published in: BMC ophthalmology Vol. 17; no. 1; p. 219
• Main Authors: Yuan, Jing, Zhang, Ling-Lin, Lu, Yu-Jie, Han, Meng-Yao, Yu, Ai-Hua, Cai, Xiao-Jun
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BioMed Central Ltd 28.11.2017; BioMed Central; BMC
• Subjects: Care and treatment; Comparative analysis; Internal limiting membrane peeling; Inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique; Macular hole-induced retinal detachment; Meta-analysis; Patient outcomes; Retinal detachment; Vitrectomy; Internal limiting membrane peeling; Vitrectomy; Inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique; Macular hole-induced retinal detachment; Meta-analysis
• ISSN: 1471-2415; 1471-2415
• DOI: 10.1186/s12886-017-0619-8

To evaluate the effects on vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling versus vitrectomy with inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique for macular hole-induced retinal detachment (MHRD). Pubmed, Cochrane Library, and Embase were systematically searched for studies that compared ILM peeling with inverted ILM flap technique for macular hole-induced retinal detachment. The primary outcomes are the rate of retinal reattachment and the rate of macular hole closure 6 months later after initial surgery, the secondary outcome is the postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) 6 months later after initial surgery. Four studies that included 98 eyes were selected. All the included studies were retrospective comparative studies. The preoperative best-corrected visual acuity was equal between ILM peeling and inverted ILM flap technique groups. It was indicated that the rate of retinal reattachment (odds ratio (OR) = 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI):0.03 to 0.69; P = 0.02) and macular hole closure (OR = 0.06, 95% CI:0.02 to 0.19; P < 0.00001) after initial surgery was higher in the group of vitrectomy with inverted ILM flap technique than that in the group of vitrectomy with ILM peeling. However, there was no statistically significant difference in postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (mean difference (MD) 0.18 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution; 95% CI -0.06 to 0.43 ; P = 0.14) between the two surgery groups. Compared with ILM peeling, vitrectomy with inverted ILM flap technique resulted significantly higher of the rate of retinal reattachment and macular hole closure, but seemed does not improve postoperative best-corrected visual acuity.