ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2024
Prediction of foveal microstructure and visual outcomes following surgery for idiopathic macular hole: An assessment using spectral-domain optical coherence tomography.
Article in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2024. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prediction of visual recovery after idiopathic macular hole surgery: a triad of tractional mechanics, subfoveal anatomy, and preoperative function.International journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Predicting anatomical success and retinal restoration following macular hole surgery using optical coherence tomography parameters.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the efficacy of two novel indices, the hole closure index (HCI) and the hole healing index (HHI), in predicting both the anatomic outcome and postoperative visual acuity following surgical intervention for idiopathic macular holes.
methodsA total of 38 patients diagnosed with idiopathic macular hole (IMH) were included. All patients underwent standard surgical treatment, including vitrectomy, internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling, and gas tamponade. Preoperative and postoperative spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) was utilized to assess the anatomical status of the macular hole (MH). The maximum distance between the tips of the external limiting membrane (ELM) was designated as the hole size (HS). HHI, calculated as the ratio of hole height to HS, and HCI, calculated as the ratio of hole height to the average of minimum diameter and base diameter, were determined. Postoperative reconstruction of ELM and ellipsoid zone (EZ) was evaluated, along with analysis of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) on a logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) scale. Regression analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between anatomical outcomes, postoperative visual acuity, and optical coherence tomography (OCT) parameters. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated for both HHI and HCI.
resultsRegression analyses revealed significant correlations between HCI and the restoration of ELM and EZ at 6 months after surgery (P = 0.002 and P = 0.014, respectively). In addition, a significant correlation was found between HHI and postoperative BCVA better than logMAR 0.52 also at 6 months after surgery (P = 0.033). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) for HCI based on ELM and EZ reconstruction was high, with values of 0.942 and 0.842, respectively. AUC for HHI, determined by ROC curve analysis of postoperative BCVA, was 0.704.
conclusionsIn conclusion, our findings indicate that HCI may be the most accurate predictor of type 1 closure, while HHI could be considered a potential predictor of postoperative visual acuity.
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.