Compare the Healing Process of Idiopathic Macular Hole With Different Surgical Techniques

Randomized Clinical Trials to Compare the Healing Process of Idiopathic Macular Hole With Different Surgical Techniques

To compare anatomic and functional results, and to evaluate postoperatively the healing process in 2 different techniques for the closure of the macular holes (MH)

Patients with macular holes classified in stages 3 and 4 will be randomized into 2 groups. . In Group A, patients will undergo peeling with complete removal of the internal limiting membrane (ILM) and in the group B, the inverted ILM peeling technique will be performed. The 20% sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) gas will be used as a tamponade agent in all surgeries, and patients will be instructed to avoid the prone position for 5 days.

OCT images will be performed in the first 5 postoperative days and months 1, 3 and 6.

The primary outcome is anatomic closure of the MH closure in the month 6. The second outcomes are: mean best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at month 6, mean change in the BCVA at month 6; integrity of the perifoveal external limiting membrane and ellipsoid zone on Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT); MH closure rate over time in days; functional improvement of microperimetry Statistical analysis will be performed with Student t-test and the p-value of ≤ 0.05 is considered significant.

Inclusion Criteria:

> Stage 3 and 4 macular holes with visual acuity between 20/30 and 20/800 according to the ETDRS chart.

Exclusion Criteria:

• Macular holes secondary to ocular trauma, myopia or retinal detachment
• Any previous treatment for the macular hole
• Evidence on examination of any diabetic retinopathy
• History or presence of wet or dry age macular degeneration (AMD)
• Presence of epiretinal membrane or prior uveitis
• Any ocular surgery within 3 months before baseline
• Intra or periocular infection