ArticleInternational journal of retina and vitreous2024
Comparison of conventional internal limiting membrane versus pars plana vitrectomy without peeling for small idiopathic macular hole.
Article in International journal of retina and vitreous, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Macular Pigment Optical Density Levels Reflect Retinal Remodeling in Lamellar Macular Holes.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026Observational
- Feasibility Study of Decellularized Corneal Lenticule in a Porcine Model for Macular Hole Closure.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Article
- Accidental diode laser-induced full-thickness macular hole: a case report.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to compare functional and anatomical changes in patients with small full thickness macular holes (FTMHs) who underwent pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with or without Internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling.
methods42 eyes of 42 patients diagnosed for FTMHs (< 250 micron) were included in our prospective interventional study. Main outcome measures were: Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA), Macular hole closure rate, Ellipsoid Zone (EZ) and External Limiting Membrane (ELM) recover, Vessel Density in both Superficial (VDSCP) and deep (VDDCP) capillary plexus, Macular pigment Optical density (MPOD) and mean Central Macular Sensitivity (CMS).Patients were randomly divided into "peeling group" (21 patients), in which the ILM peeling maneuver was performed and "no-peeling group" (21 patients) in which the ILM was not peeled off. Examinations were repeated one month (T1), three months (T2) and six months (T3) after surgery.
resultsAlthough significant improvements in terms of MPOD, CMS, VDSCP and VDDCP over time (p < 0.001) no significant differences were found between the peeling and no peeling group. Conversely, FTMHs closure was achieved in all cases (100%) in the peeling group, whereas 10% of cases in the no peeling group experienced the hole re-opening at T3, with reported different rates of ELM/EZ recover between the two groups. Nevertheless, BCVA improved significantly (p < 0.001) but without significant differences between the two groups.
conclusionsNo significant differences were found in terms of anatomical and functional outcomes between the peeling or not the ILM in small FTMHs at 6 months follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.