Observational studyIndian journal of ophthalmology2019
Internal limiting membrane peel: Does it change the success rate of primary vitrectomy without belt buckle in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments?
Observational study in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Effect of Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling on Anatomical and Visual Outcomes in Patients with Macula-Off Retinal Detachment.Turkish journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Clinical Presentation and Management of Eyes with Globe Perforation during Peribulbar and Retrobulbar Anesthesia: A Retrospective Case Series.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2022Article
- Role of Concomitant Internal Limiting Membrane (ILM) Peeling During Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment (RRD) Surgery in Preventing Postoperative Epiretinal Membrane (ERM) Formation.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the anatomic success of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) after internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling at macular area and macular plus peripapillary area versus no peeling in rhegmatogenous retinal detachments (RRD). Methods: A prospective observational study between July 2014 and March 2017 conducted on 289 eyes of 287 patients with RRD were randomly assigned to three treatment procedures, viz., PPV with no ILM peeling, PPV with macular peeling, and PPV with macular plus peripapillary peeling. Recurrent RD (ReRD) was treated as an event and accordingly the overall primary (PS) and final success (FS) rates were obtained. The risk of ReRD associated with peeling procedures after adjusting for risk factors were obtained using Cox-proportional hazard analysis. Results: The PS percentage for no peel, macular, and macular plus peripapillary procedures were 77.78% (70/90), 82.18% (83/101), and 94.89% (93/98; maximum), respectively, which was statistically significant with a P value of 0.003. The FS percentage for no peel, macular, and macular plus peripapillary were 93.33%, 95.04%, and 100%, respectively, which was significantly different with a P value of 0.048. With reference to no peeling, the adjusted hazard ratio for macular peeling was 0.841 [95% CI: 0.44-1.60] while 0.235 [95% CI: 0.088-0.626] for macular plus peripapillary peeling. Conclusion: The anatomic success rate of PPV with macular plus peripapillary ILM peeling was significantly higher as compared to no peel category. The hazard of ReRD in patients undergoing macular plus peripapillary peel was significantly reduced as compared to no peel procedure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.