ArticleTurkish journal of ophthalmology2019
Outcomes of Vitrectomy Under Air for Idiopathic Macular Hole
Article in Turkish journal of ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pars plana vitrectomy under air infusion versus conventional fluid infusion for dense vitreous hemorrhage: a retrospective comparative study.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Characteristics and management of macular hole developing after rhegmatogenous retinal detachment repair.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the outcomes of 23-gauge pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) under air compared with standard PPV for idiopathic macular hole (MH). Materials and Methods: In this prospective, comparative, interventional case series, 42 eyes of 42 patients with idiopathic MH were enrolled. Twenty-one eyes had vitrectomy with an air-infused technique and 21 eyes underwent vitrectomy with a traditional balanced salt solution-infused technique as a control group. Effective vitrectomy time, total surgery time, microperimetry (MP1), and anatomical and functional results were evaluated. Results: The mean effective vitrectomy time was significantly lower in the air group than in the control group (7.5±0.3 min and 13.3±0.5 min, respectively, P<0.001). The mean total surgery time was significantly lower in the air group than the control group (21.8±2.0 min and 25.9±1.1 min, respectively, P<0.001). There were no statistically significant changes between preoperative and 3-month postoperative retinal sensitivity values evaluated by MP1 in either group. Anatomical success at 3 months was 100% in both groups. Intraoperative complications noted during the air-infused vitrectomy were retinal touch (10%) and sudden hypotony (10%); in the two pseudophakic eyes, migration of air into the anterior chamber occurred in one (50%) and fogging of the intraocular lens in one eye (50%). Conclusion: Vitrectomy under air infusion for idiopathic MH showed some advantages over a traditional vitrectomy technique in terms of vitreous visualization, effective vitrectomy time, and total surgery duration, without significantly increasing intraoperative and postoperative complication rates. Postoperative microperimetry results indicated no specific damage to the retina or optic nerve related to the continuous air infusion.
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.