ArticleFrontiers in medicine2023
Outcomes of revision surgery for idiopathic macular hole after failed primary vitrectomy.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vitrectomy with inner limiting membrane peeling effectively reduces ellipsoid zone defect diameter in patients with idiopathic macular holes.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Successful closure of a refractory giant (15 sq mm) macular hole with amniotic membrane graft.Journal of surgical case reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Persistent idiopathic macular hole (PIMH), the occurrence of idiopathic macular holes that have failed to close after standard pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling, has become a global health threat to the aging population. Because postoperative anatomic closure or restoration of visual acuity is more difficult to achieve in PIMH, surgical approaches that would yield the best outcomes remain to be elucidated. On paper, extended ILM peeling combined with silicone oil (SiO) tamponade is believed to be a feasible option for excellent macular hole closure. However, no studies on this combined treatment for PIMH is compared with simple air tamponade have been conducted. Thus, in this retrospective case series, we used spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) and other technologies to investigate real-world evidence for the anatomical and functional outcomes of revisional PPV with either SiO or air tamponade for failed primary idiopathic macular hole surgery. We included the records of 76 patients with PIMH who had SD-OCT examinations and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA). Regression analysis was performed to find factors affecting PIMH fracture closure. Seventy-six participants were allocated to a SiO group (n = 21, with an extended ILM peeling and SiO tamponade) or an air group (n = 55, with extended ILM peeling and air tamponade). Anatomical success was achieved in 18 (85.7%) and 40 (72.7%) eyes in the SiO and air groups, respectively (
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.