london euretina

This meeting has been awarded 20 CME credits

Security Notice

Please note that Kuoni are our only destination management company. Other venders indicating that are operating for the society should be ignored. We never use western union as a payment portal

Comparison of results between two groups of patients with open macular hole treated with or without re-ILM peeling and C3F8 gas injection

Session Details

Session Title: Quick Fire Free Paper 5

Session Date/Time: Sunday 14/09/2014 | 11:00-13:00

Paper Time: 12:40

Venue: Boulevard B

First Author: : T.Sinha INDIA

Co Author(s): :                  

Abstract Details

Purpose:

aim of the study is to compare results of two groups of patients with open macular hole treated previously with primary vitrectomy with primary ILM peeling and air or SF6 gas injection, with or without re ILM peeling and C3F8 gas injection.

Setting:

: Retrospective consecutive case series done under referral eye hospital in Eastern India

Methods:

Retrospective study included 25 cases with open macular hole. All the patients treated previously with 23G vitrectomy with 0.18% Trypan Blue or Brilliant G assisted ILM peeling with 20 % SF6 gas or air injection. Mean age of patients 54.5+/-6.18 years Second surgery done within 3.4+/- 2.4 months of primary surgery, M:F 13:12 .In Group A 14(56%) patients treated with Re-vitrectomy with Trypan Blue or Brilliant G dye assisted re ILM peeling from arcade to arcade and 14 % C3F8 gas injection. In Group B 11(44%) patients with fluid air exchange and 14% C3F8 gas injection. All the patients advised for prone position for 12 hours/day for next 7 days. Cases followed up on 7th day, 14th day,1 month, 3 months and 6 months with vision ,SD OCT and IOP.

Results:

: In Group A 10(71.42%) patients achieved Type I closure,3(21.42%) achieved Type 2 closure and one( 7.16%) macular hole remained open. In Group B 7 ( 63.63%) patients achieved Type I closure,3(27.27%) achieved Type 2 closure and one (9.09%) remained open. BCVA of type 1 closure improved significantly from logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution log MAR 1.68+/-0.31 to 0.82+/-0.31 with P value <.005,BCVA for type 2 closure improved from1.75+/-0.31 to 1.47 +/-0.31 with P value .05.Though chance of achieving Type 1 closure is higher in Group A but it is not statistically significant.

Conclusions:

: Re-vitrectomy with or without re-ILM peeling with 14% C3F8 gas injection and prone position can close most of open macular hole after primary macular hole surgery. Re-ILM peeling gives higher chance of achieving Type 1 closure and better visual outcome.

Back to previous
EURETINA, Temple House, Temple Road, Blackrock, Co Dublin. | Phone: 00353 1 2100092 | Fax: 00353 1 2091112 | Email: euretina@euretina.org

Privacy policyHotel Terms and Conditions Cancellation policy