Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36717928›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of retina and vitreous2023

Surgical classification for large macular hole: based on different surgical techniques results: the CLOSE study group.

Flavio A Rezende, Bruna G Ferreira, Emmanouil Rampakakis, David H Steel, Michael J Koss, Zofia A Nawrocka, Daniela Bacherini, Eduardo B Rodrigues, Carsten H Meyer, Tomaso Caporossi and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of retina and vitreous, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
17.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Optimal approaches for managing recurrent macular holes: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. The use of amniotic membrane or inverted internal limiting membrane flap for large or refractory macular holes: a prospective, comparative study using microperimetry.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025
    Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

14 authors at 11 institutions in 6 countries.

Flavio A RezendeDepartment of Ophthalmology, Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital, CIUSSS de l'est d'ile de Montréal, University of Montreal, 801 Rue de la Commune est, ap 501, Montreal, QC, H2V0A3, Canada. frezendef@icloud.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7764-6713
Bruna G FerreiraDepartment of Ophthalmology, Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital, CIUSSS de l'est d'ile de Montréal, University of Montreal, 801 Rue de la Commune est, ap 501, Montreal, QC, H2V0A3, Canada.
Emmanouil RampakakisFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
David H SteelSunderland Eye Infirmary, Sunderland, and Newcastle University, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, UK.
Michael J KossAugenzentrum Nymphenburger Höfe/Augenklinik Herzog Carl Theodor, Munich, Germany.
Zofia A NawrockaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Klinika Okulistyczna, Lodz, Poland.
Daniela BacheriniDepartment of Neurosciences, Psychology, Drug Research and Child Health, Eye Clinic, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Eduardo B RodriguesDepartment of Ophthalmology, St. Louis University, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Carsten H MeyerAugenärzte Graubünden, Davos, Switzerland.
Tomaso CaporossiFondazione Policlínico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Tamer H MahmoudAssociated Retinal Consultants, Beaumont Neuroscience Center, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Royal Oak, MI, USA.
Stanislao RizzoFondazione Policlínico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Mark W JohnsonDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Jay S DukerNew England Eye Center, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont · CAUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · ITBlindeninstitutsstiftung · DEKantonsspital Graubünden · CHMcGill University Health Centre · CAOakland University · USSaint Louis University · USSunderland Eye Infirmary · GBTufts Medical Center · USUniversity of Florence · ITUniversity of Michigan · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe CLOSE study group proposes an updated surgical classification for large macular holes based on a systematic review of new treatments. Recently, many new techniques have been introduced to treat large full-thickness macular holes (FTMH); although the indications are not clear. An updated surgical classification is needed to help surgical decision-making.

methodsWe gathered published series by the CLOSE Study Group members and from literature search until June 2021. Techniques included: internal limiting membrane peeling (ILM peeling), ILM flaps, macular hydrodissection (macular hydro), human amniotic membrane graft (hAM), and autologous retinal transplantation (ART). Within each technique, chi-square test assessed association between the minimal linear diameter (MLD) (in µm) and closure rate; the postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) gains were compared among groups.

resultsData extraction included 31 published articles: total of 1135 eyes. Eyes were divided into the following groups: ILM peel (n: 683), ILM Flap (n: 233), macular hydrodissection (n: 64), hAM (n: 59), and ART (n: 96). The initial BCVA and size were heterogenous between the groups. ILM peel showed the best results in large FTMH ≤ 535 µm (closure rate 96.8%); adjusted mean BCVA: 0.49 (LogMAR) with a statistical difference among groups. Large FTMH between 535 and 799 µm: ILM flap technique showed better results (closure rate 99.0%); adjusted mean BCVA: 0.67(LogMAR); also with a statistical difference. For large FTMH ≥ 800 µm more invasive techniques are required. Use of hAM, macular hydrodissection and ART showed higher closure rates for this category (100%, 83.3% and 90.5% respectively), and adjusted mean BCVA varied from 0.76 to 0.89. Although there was no statistical difference between those techniques for this group due to the smaller number of cases.

conclusionsThe CLOSE study group demonstrated the potential usefulness of a new surgical classification for large FTMHs and propose OCT biomarkers for use in clinical practice and future research. This new classification demonstrated that Large (400-550 µm) and X-Large (550-800 µm) holes can be treated highly successfully with ILM peel and ILM flap techniques, respectively. Further studies are necessary for the larger FTMHs (XX-Large and Giant), using the CLOSE classification, in order to determine which technique is better suited for each hole size and characteristics.

Indexed as

Close study groupLarge macular holesSurgical macular hole classification

Identifiers

PMID36717928
PMCPMC9885593
OpenAlexW4318475176

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.