Comparing the inverted internal limiting membrane flap with autologous blood technique to internal limiting membrane insertion for the repair of refractory macular hole

Abstract

Purpose To compare the anatomical and functional outcomes of the inverted internal limiting membrane (ILM) flap technique and the autologous blood clot (ABC) to ILM insertion technique for the repair of refractory macular hole (RMH). Methods Fifty-two consecutive patients (52 eyes) diagnosed with RMH with a minimum diameter more than 700\xa0µm were enrolled. All patients underwent vitrectomy and gas tamponade. Of these, 25 patients undergo inverted ILM flap combination with ABC (Group A). The remaining 27 patients underwent ILM insertion (Group B). The main outcome measures were macular hole (MH) closure, foveal configuration, logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), superficial foveal avascular zone (FAZ) and superficial parafoveal vessel density. Results Three months post-operation, MH was successfully anatomic closed in 24 of 25 eyes (96%) in Group A and 25 of 27 eyes (92.5%) in Group B ( P \xa0=\xa00.599). A concave foveal configuration of MH closure was observed in 23 of 25 eyes (92%) in Group A and 2 of 27 eyes (7.4%) in Group B ( P \xa0<\xa00.001). Mean BCVA (logMAR) had improved from 1.31\xa0±\xa00.61 to 0.68\xa0±\xa00.40 in Group A ( P \xa0<\xa00.001) and from 1.34\xa0±\xa00.39 to 1.29\xa0±\xa00.62 in Group B ( P \xa0=\xa00.584) at 3\xa0months. Average superficial FAZ area and superficial parafoveal vessel density were 0.29\xa0±\xa00.08\xa0mm 2 and 51.41\xa0±\xa02.79% in Group A and 0.73\xa0±\xa00.15\xa0mm 2 and 43.77\xa0±\xa02.71% in Group B, respectively. There was a significant difference in both the average superficial FAZ area and parafoveal vessel density between Groups A and B ( P \xa0<\xa00.001 for both). Conclusion Anatomical foveal configuration, mean BCVA (logMAR), mean superficial FAZ and parafoveal vessel density outcomes for the inverted ILM flap combined with ABC approach were better than the outcomes obtained with ILM insertion in the treatment of RMH. This approach may promote better long-term, vision function outcomes for patients diagnosed with RMH.