COMPARISON OF INTERNAL LIMITING MEMBRANE PEELING WITH THE INVERTED INTERNAL LIMITING MEMBRANE FLAP TECHNIQUE FOR RHEGMATOGENOUS RETINAL DETACHMENT COEXISTING WITH MACULAR HOLE.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the anatomical and functional outcomes of internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling and the inverted ILM flap technique for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment coexisting with macular hole.

METHODS

This retrospective study evaluated the medical records of 79 eyes with concurrent rhegmatogenous retinal detachment and macular hole received vitrectomy and silicone oil tamponade, with ILM peeling on 56 eyes and the inverted ILM flap technique on 23 eyes.

RESULTS

The Type 1 closure rate was greater in the inverted ILM flap group than the ILM peeling group (82.6% vs. 55.4%, P = 0.038). Lines of improvement were 7.8 ± 5.3 in the ILM peeling group and 8.9 ± 5.6 in the inverted ILM flap group. Postoperative epiretinal membrane and retinal reattachment rates were similar in two surgical groups (16.1% vs. 21.7%, P = 0.535 and 94.6% vs. 95.7%, P = 0.999, respectively). Type 1 closure was significantly correlated with the inverted ILM flap technique (OR = 5.568, P = 0.023). The inverted ILM flap technique showed no significant association with the final logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution best-corrected visual acuity in multivariate model analysis.

CONCLUSION

The inverted ILM flap technique was more effective in restoring the macular structure in patients with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment and coexisting macular hole, but the functional outcomes of the two strategies were comparable.