Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

PARS PLANA VITRECTOMY WITH AND WITHOUT PEELING OF THE INNER LIMITING MEMBRANE FOR DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA

PATEL, JIGNESH I. BSc, FRCOphth*†; HYKIN, PHILLIP G. FRCOphth*; SCHADT, MARKUS BSc, MCOptom*; LUONG, VY BSc; FITZKE, FRED PhD; GREGOR, ZDENEK J. FRCS, FRCOphth*

Original Articles
Buy

Purpose: A prospective, comparative, nonrandomized study to evaluate the efficacy of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with and without inner limiting membrane (ILM) peeling for persistent diffuse clinically significant macular edema.

Methods: Eighteen patients with persistent diffuse clinically significant macular edema despite laser photocoagulation were recruited for the study. Clinical assessment included determination of best-corrected visual acuity, fundus fluorescein angiography, optical coherence tomography, and perifoveal cone function testing. Eight patients underwent PPV with elevation and removal of the posterior hyaloid alone, and 10 patients underwent vitrectomy and ILM peeling. The follow-up was 12 months.

Results: Patients with ILM peeling had improvement in foveal thickness (P = 0.07) and significant improvement in the macular volume (P = 0.039) 12 months after surgery but did not have significant improvement in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study vision or perifoveal cone function. There was no significant difference in outcome parameters between the no peeling group and the ILM peeling group.

Conclusions: In this prospective, comparative study of PPV with and without ILM peeling for diffuse clinically significant macular edema, structural improvement was seen but with limited visual improvement after ILM peeling.

A prospective comparative study of pars plana vitrectomy with and without inner limiting membrane peeling was performed. Despite macular structural improvements associated with both treatments, no significant functional improvements were seen 1 year after inner limiting membrane peeling.

From *Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom; and †Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom.

The study was performed at Moorfields Eye Hospital and Institute of Ophthalmology and was supported by a grant from the Stringer Fellowship.

The authors have no financial disclosures or proprietary interests.

Reprint requests: Jignesh I. Patel, Department of Pathology, Institute of Ophthalmology, 11-43 Bath Street, London EC1V 9EL, United Kingdom.

© The Ophthalmic Communications Society, Inc.