ArticleScientific reports2022
Effect of inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique on small-medium size macular holes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Critical analysis of macular hole repair techniques: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis comparing internal limiting membrane flap and internal limiting membrane peeling for any size of macular hole.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy of inverted inner limiting membrane flap technique for macular holes of ≤400 μm: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- ILM flap coverage versus conventional ILM peeling for idiopathic full-thickness macular hole: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Membrane flex loop-assisted peeling and giant flap creation for primary repair of idiopathic macular holes: a pilot study.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2025Article
- A case of macular telangiectasia type 2 with bilateral macular holes: Imaging features and surgical management.Medicine · 2025Article
- Vitrectomy in Small idiopathic MAcuLar hoLe (SMALL) study: conventional internal limiting membrane peeling versus inverted flap.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- Article
- Epiretinal proliferation embedding combined with internal limiting membrane flap inversion for secondary macular hole: Two case reports.American journal of ophthalmology case reports · 2023Article
- Intraoperative Optical Coherence Tomography in the Management of Macular Holes: State of the Art and Future Perspectives.Biomedicines · 2022Review
- Comparative Study of Conventional Inverted ILM Flap Covering and ILM Flap Filling Technique in Idiopathic Macular Hole Treatment: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.Journal of ophthalmology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inverted internal limiting membrane (ILM) flap technique was developed to achieve macular hole (MH) closure in large MH and refractory cases. In this study, we evaluate the effect of the technique for small-medium size MH. We recruited patients who underwent vitrectomy for small-medium size (< 400 μm) MH with either inverted ILM flap technique (flap group) or with conventional ILM peeling (peeling group). Using propensity score, 21 eyes of 21 patients in the peeling group were matched against 21 eyes of 21 patients in the flap group. We compared MH closure rate, postoperative visual acuity, and recovery of the external limiting membrane (ELM) and ellipsoid zone (EZ). The MH closure rate was not different between the two groups (flap vs peeling: 90% vs 100%, P = 0.49). Whereas there was no significant difference in visual acuity improvement between the two groups, the flap group showed more disruption of the ELM 3 months after surgery and of the EZ at 3 and 6 months after surgery (P = 0.02, P = 0.03, and P = 0.04, respectively). The result suggested that inverted ILM flap technique does not have additional benefits for small-medium size MHs and may delay recovery of retinal integrity.
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.