This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.
Surgical outcomes differ depending on type of lamellar macular hole
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts
Patients with lamellar macular holes with lamellar hole-associated epiretinal proliferation tend to have worse visual outcomes compared with patients who have highly reflective epiretinal membranes.
A retrospective chart review of 33 patients divided into three groups depending on the type of macular hole and presence of lamellar hole-associated epiretinal proliferation (LHEP) showed there are two groups of patients that fit the classification of lamellar macular holes, study co-author Wonseok Choi, MD, told Healio.com/OSN.
“We studied this condition based on the international classification of vitreoretinal interface disorders and, like other investigators, found that there are two groups of patients that fit the classification of lamellar macular holes. The surgical outcomes for these two groups differ, and we hope that our publication helps the clinician to clarify better what surgical results might be expected,” he said.
Group one included patients with epiretinal membranes with lamellar macular holes (LMH) without LHEP, group two included patients with LMH with LHEP, and group three included patients with full-thickness macular holes with LHEP.
The three groups had no significant differences in preoperative best corrected visual acuity. After surgery, the BCVA in group one was significantly better than in group two, but there were no differences between group one and group three or group two and group three.
Group one also had significantly less ellipsoid zone disruption after surgery than group two.
“I know that there has been an international consortium planning to revise the classification of lamellar holes that more accurately reflect the natural course and surgical outcomes,” Choi said. – by Robert Linnehan
Disclosures: The authors report no relevant financial disclosures.
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts