Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40722125›Full record

ReviewEye and vision (London, England)2025

Controversies, consensuses, and guidelines on macular hole surgery by the Asia-Pacific Vitreo-retina Society (APVRS) and the Asia-Pacific Academy of Professors in Ophthalmology (AAPPO).

Nishant V Radke, Paisan Ruamviboonsuk, David H Steel, Tian Tian, Alex P Hunyor, Andrew S H Tsai, Andrew Chang, Chung-May Yang, Chi-Chun Lai, Fangtian Dong and 17 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Eye and vision (London, England), 2025. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  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

27 authors.

Nishant V Radke *The Primasia International Eye Research Institute (PIERI) of The Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen), Shenzhen, China.
Paisan Ruamviboonsuk *Retina Division, Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Rajvithi Hospital, Rangsit University, Bangkok, Thailand.
David H SteelSunderland Eye Infirmary, Sunderland, UK.
Tian TianDepartment of Ophthalmology, Xin Hua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Kongjiang Road, No. 1665, Shanghai, 200092, China.
Alex P HunyorMacula Research Group, Save Sight Institute, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Andrew S H TsaiSingapore National Eye Centre, Singapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore, Singapore.
Andrew ChangSydney Retina Clinic, Sydney Eye Hospital, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Chung-May YangDepartment of Ophthalmology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, China.
Chi-Chun LaiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou Main Branch, Taoyuan, Taiwan, China.
Fangtian DongDepartment of Ophthalmology, State Key Laboratory of Complex Severe and Rare Diseases, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Key Laboratory of Ocular Fundus Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Jennifer I LimDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Jay ChhablaniUniversity of Pittsburgh, School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Kenny H W LaiThe C-MER Dennis Lam and Partners Eye Center, C-MER International Eye Care Group, Hong Kong, China.
Mahesh P ShanmugamVitreoretinal and Oncology Services, Sankara Eye Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
Peter StalmansDepartment Ophthalmology, UZ Leuven, Louvain, Belgium.
Pradeep VenkateshDepartment of Ophthalmology, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Robert F LamThe C-MER Dennis Lam and Partners Eye Center, C-MER International Eye Care Group, Hong Kong, China.
Se Joon WooDepartment of Ophthalmology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.
Shaochong ZhangShenzhen Eye Hospital, Shenzhen Eye Institute, Jinan University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.
Taraprasad DasDepartment of Ophthalmology, LV Prasad Eye Institute, Kalam Anji Reddy Campus, Anant Bajaj Retina Institute, Srimati Kanuri Santhmma Centre for Vitreoretinal Diseases, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Timothy Y Y LaiDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Vinod KumarDepartment of Ophthalmology, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Xin HuangEye Institute and Department of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Zhaotian ZhangState Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Zhaoyang WangOphthalmology, Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Peiquan ZhaoDepartment of Ophthalmology, Xin Hua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Kongjiang Road, No. 1665, Shanghai, 200092, China. zhaopeiquan@126.com.
Dennis S C LamThe Primasia International Eye Research Institute (PIERI) of The Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen), Shenzhen, China. dennislam321@cuhk.edu.hk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5276-3702

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Macular hole surgery, primarily pars plana vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling (ILM) and gas tamponade, has become the standard of care for full-thickness macular hole (FTMH). Despite the 85% to 95% anatomical closure rate, several aspects of the procedure are well accepted whereas some may remain controversial among vitreoretinal surgeons. An international panel of experts (IPE) comprising 27 experts from 10 countries/territories was established to evaluate a total of 38 consensus statements on ILM peeling extent, vital dye selection, face-down positioning requirements, tamponade options, timing of surgery and re-surgery, management of difficult and refractory cases, and adjuvant therapies. The objective is to synthesize evidence-based real-world practice recommendations from leading global experts to guide the management of FTMH. Of the 38 statements, the IPE reached consensus (75% voted as "Strong Agreement" or "Agreement") on 29 (76.3%). The IPE emphasized the importance of individualized patient factors-such as hole size, chronicity, lens status, and preoperative visual acuity-in surgical planning and tempering patient's postoperative expectations. There was strong agreement on the need of adequate peeling of the ILM, adjunctive measures including the inverted ILM flap, and face-down positioning for large and refractory FTMH. Controversial statements, such as the use of air tamponade or observation of small FTMH, not reaching consensus are identified. We hope the consensus statements agreed and disagreed by the IPE would help serve as good reference and guidelines in managing FTMH.

Indexed as

AAPPOAPVRSConsensusControversyDiagnosisMacular hole surgeryManagement

Identifiers

PMID40722125
PMCPMC12302760

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.