Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33528646›Full record

ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2021

The visual outcomes of idiopathic epiretinal membrane removal in eyes with ectopic inner foveal layers and preserved macular segmentation.

Michele Coppola, Maria Brambati, Maria Vittoria Cicinelli, Alessandro Marchese, Emma Clara Zanzottera, Antonio Peroglio Deiro, Michal Post, Francesco Bandello

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Evaluating ERM Stage and DRIL as predictive biomarkers for functional outcomes after iERM surgery.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Michele CoppolaDepartment of Ophthalmology, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy.
Maria BrambatiDepartment of Ophthalmology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy.
Maria Vittoria CicinelliDepartment of Ophthalmology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy. Cicinelli.mariavittoria@hsr.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2938-0409
Alessandro MarcheseDepartment of Ophthalmology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy.
Emma Clara ZanzotteraDepartment of Ophthalmology, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy.
Antonio Peroglio DeiroDepartment of Ophthalmology, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy.
Michal PostDepartment of Ophthalmology, SPKSO Ophthalmic Hospital, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Francesco BandelloDepartment of Ophthalmology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy.
Vita-Salute San Raffaele University · ITAzienda Ospedaliera San Gerardo · ITMedical University of Warsaw · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo analyze the functional impact of ectopic inner foveal layers (EIFL), along with other clinical and optical coherence tomography biomarkers, on patients with epiretinal membrane (ERM) and preserved foveal layers' segmentation undergoing ERM removal.

methodsRetrospective review of consecutive patients with ERM who underwent pars plana vitrectomy with ERM peeling from December 2018 to December 2019. Baseline factors including age, gender, lens status, phacoemulsification at the time of surgery, tamponade agent, dye used for ERM and internal limiting membrane (ILM) enhancement, ILM peeling, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT), presence and thickness of EIFL, thickness of outer nuclear layer (ONL), presence of a cotton ball, subfoveal state of photoreceptors, and presence of cystoid macular edema were included in a multivariable model having the BCVA at 12 months as the main outcome. The changes in EIFL and ONL thickness over time were also analyzed.

resultsFifty-one patients (58 eyes, 23 eyes in the no EIFL group, and 35 eyes in the EIFL group) were enrolled. The BCVA significantly improved over 12 months after surgery, regardless of the presence of EIFL (p < 0.001). Eyes with no EIFL had better BCVA at month 3 (p = 0.04), but this difference was no longer detectable at 6 and 12 months. The presence of EIFL was not associated with the final BCVA (p = 0.9), while the CMT at 12 months correlated with EIFL thickness (r = 0.8, p = 0.008).

conclusionPatients with EIFL could reach optimal visual acuity in the absence of disorganization of the inner retinal layers but should be warned of potentially longer healing times. None of the morphologic signs included in this study precluded good visual recovery on long-term follow-up.

Indexed as

Epiretinal MembraneFovea CentralisHumansInfantRetinaRetrospective StudiesTomography, Optical CoherenceVitrectomyBiomarkersEctopic inner foveal layerEpiretinal membraneOptical coherence tomographyPars plana vitrectomy

Identifiers

PMID33528646
OpenAlexW3126929379

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.