Back to Search Start Over

Internal limiting membrane peeling or not: a systematic review and meta-analysis of idiopathic macular pucker surgery.

Authors :
Fang XL
Tong Y
Zhou YL
Zhao PQ
Wang ZY
Source :
The British journal of ophthalmology [Br J Ophthalmol] 2017 Nov; Vol. 101 (11), pp. 1535-1541. Date of Electronic Publication: 2017 Mar 17.
Publication Year :
2017

Abstract

Purpose: To determine whether internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling improves anatomical and functional outcomes in idiopathic macular pucker (IMP)/epiretinal membrane (ERM) surgery in this systematic review and meta-analysis.<br />Methods: We searched the PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane, Ovid MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and CNKI databases for studies published before 15 September 2016. The eligibility criteria included studies comparing ILM peeling versus no-peeling for IMP surgery.<br />Results: Thirteen articles (10 retrospective cohort studies, 1 prospective cohort study and 2 randomised controlled trials (RCTs)) were included in the review. Primary outcomes: no differences were observed in the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) or central macular thickness (CMT) at 12 months; however, lower ERM recurrence (OR, 0.13; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.41; p=0.0004) and reoperation rates (OR, 0.10; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.49; p=0.004) that favoured ILM peeling were observed at the final follow-up.<br />Secondary Outcomes: no difference was observed in BCVA at 3, 6 months, the final follow-up or in CMT at 3, 6 months, the final follow-up. Significantly increased CMT, which favoured ILM peeling, was observed at the final follow-up (p=0.002) in the RCTs.<br />Conclusions: ILM peeling yielded greater anatomical success, but no improvement in functional outcomes as the treatment of choice for patients undergoing IMP surgery.<br />Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.<br /> (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1468-2079
Volume :
101
Issue :
11
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
The British journal of ophthalmology
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
28314834
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2016-309768