Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36078977›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022

Primary Lamellar Macular Holes: To Vit or Not to Vit.

Lihteh Wu, Ryan Bradshaw

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Lamellar macular hole in highly myopic eyes and insights into its development, evolution, and treatment: a mini-review.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2024
    Review
  4. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Lihteh WuAsociados de Macula, Vitreo y Retina de Costa Rica, Primer Piso Torre Mercedes, Paseo Colón, San José 10102, Costa Rica.ORCID 0000-0002-3387-7058
Ryan BradshawCentro de Oftalmologia y Microcirugia Boyd, Departamento de Retina, Panama City 0816-02593, Panama.ORCID 0000-0002-2343-5862
New York Eye and Ear Infirmary · USUniversidad de Panamá · PA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a wide spectrum of macular conditions that are characterized by an irregular foveal contour caused by a break in the inner fovea. These include full-thickness macular hole (FTMH), foveal pseudocyst, lamellar macular hole (LMH) and macular pseudohole (MPH). Clinical examination of vitreomacular interface disorders is notoriously poor in differentiating these conditions. These conditions were initially described with slit-lamp biomicroscopy, and the main goal was to distinguish an FTMH from the others. The introduction of optical coherence tomography (OCT) has revolutionized our understanding of the foveal microstructural anatomy and has facilitated differentiating these conditions from an FTMH. However, the definitions of the other conditions, particularly LMH, has evolved over the past two decades. Initially the term LMH encompassed a wide spectrum of clinical conditions. As OCT became more widely used and observations became more refined, two different phenotypes of LMH became apparent, raising the question of different pathogenic mechanisms for each phenotype. Tractional and degenerative pathological mechanisms were proposed. Epiretinal membranes (ERMs) associated with each phenotype were identified. Typical ERMs were associated with a tractional mechanism, whereas an epiretinal proliferation was associated with a degenerative mechanism. Epiretinal proliferation represents Müller cell proliferation as a reactive process to retinal injury. These two types of ERM were differentiated by their characteristics on SD-OCT. The latest consensus definitions take into account this phenotypic differentiation and classifies these entities into LMH, MPH and ERM foveoschisis. The initial event in both ERM foveoschisis and LMH is a tractional event that disrupts the Müller cell cone in the foveola or the foveal walls. Depending on the extent of Müller cell disruption, either a LMH or an ERM foveoschisis may develop. Although surgical intervention for LMH remains controversial and no clear guidelines exist for pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), eyes with symptomatic, progressive ERM foveoschisis and LMH may benefit from surgical intervention.

Indexed as

epiretinal proliferationERM foveoschisislamellar hole epiretinal proliferationlamellar macular holemacular holesmacular pseudoholepartial thickness macular holesvitrectomy

Identifiers

PMID36078977
PMCPMC9457236
OpenAlexW4293717892

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.