COMPARISON OF THREE INTERNAL LIMITING MEMBRANE PEELING TECHNIQUES FOR MYOPIC TRACTION MACULOPATHY WITH HIGH RISK OF POSTOPERATIVE MACULAR HOLE DEVELOPMENT.

PURPOSE: To compare three different internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling techniques, including standard ILM peeling, fovea-sparing ILM peeling, and inverted ILM flap (ILMF), in the treatment of myopic traction maculopathy with high risk of postoperative macular hole development.

METHOD: This retrospective cohort study enrolled 101 eyes suffering from lamellar macular hole combined with myopic traction maculopathy in 98 consecutive patients who underwent vitrectomy with either standard ILM peeling, fovea-sparing ILM peeling, or ILMF from July 2017 to August 2020. All patients were followed up for at least 12 months after surgery. Best-corrected visual acuity, macular anatomical outcomes, and postoperative full-thickness macular hole (FTMH) formation were evaluated.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found among the three surgical groups in baseline characteristics. 12 months after surgery, the mean best-corrected visual acuity was significantly improved ( P < 0.001) and showed no significant differences among groups ( P = 0.452). None of the eyes in the ILMF group, five eyes (15.6%) in the standard ILM peeling group, and six eyes (17.1%) in the fovea-sparing ILM peeling group developed a postoperative FTMH ( P = 0.026). Logistic regression showed that the ILM peeling technique was an independent influencing factor for FTMH formation (OR = 0.209, P = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

Compared with the standard ILM peeling or fovea-sparing ILM peeling technique, the ILMF technique resulted in similar visual outcomes but a relatively low incidence of postoperative FTMH in the treatment of lamellar macular hole combined with myopic traction maculopathy. Inverted ILM flap is an effective technique for treating myopic traction maculopathy with high risk of postoperative FTMH development.