Vitrectomy for idiopathic macular hole

Background A macular hole is an anatomic opening in the retina that develops at the fovea. Macular holes can be seen in highly myopic eyes or following ocular trauma, but the great majority are idiopathic. Pars plana vitrectomy was introduced to treat full‐thickness macular holes, which if left untr...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2015-05, Vol.2015 (5), p.CD009080-CD009080
Hauptverfasser: Parravano, Mariacristina, Giansanti, Fabrizio, Eandi, Chiara M, Yap, Yew C, Rizzo, Stanislao, Virgili, Gianni
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background A macular hole is an anatomic opening in the retina that develops at the fovea. Macular holes can be seen in highly myopic eyes or following ocular trauma, but the great majority are idiopathic. Pars plana vitrectomy was introduced to treat full‐thickness macular holes, which if left untreated have a poor prognosis since spontaneous closure and visual recovery are rare. Vitrectomy is a surgical technique involving the removal of the vitreous body that fills the eye. The surgeon inserts thin cannulas into the eyes through scleral incisions to relieve traction exerted by the vitreous or epiretinal membranes to the central retina and to induce glial tissue to bridge and close the hole. Objectives The primary objective of this review was to examine the effects of vitrectomy for idiopathic macular hole on visual acuity. A secondary objective was to investigate anatomic effects on hole closure and other dimensions of visual function, as well as to report on adverse effects recorded in included studies. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register (4 March 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 2), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In‐Process and Other Non‐Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to March 2015), EMBASE (January 1980 to March 2015), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (January 1982 to March 2015), the Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index‐Science (CPCI‐S) (January 1980 to March 2015), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 4 March 2015. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials comparing vitrectomy (with or without internal limiting membrane peeling) to no treatment (that is observation) for macular holes. Data collection and analysis We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently extracted the data. We estimated best corrected visual acuity and macular hole closure at 6 to 12 months of follow‐up. Main results Three studies provided data on the comparison between vitrectomy and observation in eyes with macul
ISSN:1465-1858
1465-1858
1469-493X
DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD009080.pub2