Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37542557›Full record

ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2023

Internal limiting membrane flap with viscoelastic device for lamellar hole surgery with no postoperative positioning.

Efraim Berco, Roee Arnon, Yuval Kozlov, Justin Lerann Shad, Nir Shoham-Hazon, Raman Tuli, Assaf Hilely

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, 2023. 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
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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 · 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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Efraim Berco *Department of Ophthalmology, Kaplan Medical Center, Rehovot, Israel.
Roee Arnon *Dan-Petah-Tiqwa District, Clalit Health Services, 13th David Ben Gurion, Bnei Brak, Israel. roee.arnon@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9995-8574
Yuval KozlovDepartment of Military Medicine and "Tzameret", Faculty of Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Justin Lerann ShadUniversity of California, Los Angeles, USA.
Nir Shoham-HazonDalhousie University Nova Scotia, Eye NB Centre of Excellence, Miramichi, New Brunswick, Canada.
Raman Tuli *Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Assaf Hilely *Ophthalmology, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Hebrew University of Jerusalem · ILClalit Health Services · ILDalhousie University · CATel Aviv University · ILUniversity of California, Los Angeles · USUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo propose a novel technique of an internal limiting membrane (ILM) flap using ophthalmic viscoelastic device (OVD) with no requirement for postoperative head posture for the treatment of lamellar macular hole (LMH) repair.

methodsA retrospective analysis of 16 consecutive eyes of LMH patients who underwent vitrectomy with ILM flap with OVD. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), simultaneous cataract extraction, and ellipsoid zone disruption preoperatively and at the final follow-up were compared.

resultsThe mean age was 73.19 ± 7.26 years, and ten patients (62%) were females. The mean follow-up was 5.06±1.43 months (range 3-6). For all patients, BCVA was significantly improved at the final visit, from 0.65±0.36 logMAR units to 0.42±0.29 (p < 0.001). None of the patients had visual loss. Six patients had epiretinal membrane (ERM) foveoschisis, and the rest had LMH with epiretinal proliferation. Both subgroups presented a significant improvement in their BCVA with a trend for better improvement in the latter (p=0.09). Ellipsoid zone disruption was seen in 7 patients including one patient with a macular scar. There was no significant effect of ellipsoid zone disruption on the final BCVA (p=0.33). Twelve eyes (75%) underwent simultaneous cataract extraction. Mean BCVA at the final postoperative visit improved regardless of whether the eyes underwent simultaneous cataract surgery (p=0.39). CMT was also significantly improved at the final visit, from 200.06±46.8 μm preoperatively to 305.00±85.5 μm (p<0.001). No full-thickness macular holes were developed postoperatively. No intraoperative or postoperative complications were observed.

conclusionsTreatment of LMH with ILM flap with OVD showed promising anatomical and functional results with no postoperative head position requirements.

Indexed as

Epiretinal MembraneRetinal PerforationsAgedAged, 80 and overBasement MembraneFemaleHumansMaleRetinaRetrospective StudiesTomography, Optical CoherenceVisual AcuityVitrectomyInternal limiting membrane flapLamellar macular holePars plana vitrectomyPostoperative positioningViscoelastic

Identifiers

PMID37542557
OpenAlexW4385606874

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.