Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Primary outcome: difference of microperimetry retinal sensitivity after primary vitrectomy for idiopathic full thickness macular holes with inverted flap technique versus internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling technique Secondary outcomes: difference of visual change after primary vitrectomy for idiopathic full thickness macular holes with inverted flap technique versus internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling technique; difference in closure rate after primary vitrectomy for idiopathic full thickness macular holes with inverted flap technique versus internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling technique
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| inverted flap | Active Comparator |
| |
| peeling internal limiting membrane (ILM) | Active Comparator |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| inverted flap | Procedure | full thickness macular hole surgery |
| |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Microperimetry retinal sensitivity | Difference of microperimetry retinal sensitivity after primary vitrectomy for idiopathic full thickness macular holes with inverted flap technique versus internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling technique | 3 months |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) | Difference of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) after primary vitrectomy for idiopathic full thickness macular holes with inverted flap technique versus internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling technique | 3 months |
| Closure rate |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIchele Reibaldi, MD | Contact | 0116331863 | michele.reibaldi@unito.it |
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A.O.U. Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino | Recruiting | Torino | 10126 | Italy |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 36084331 | Derived | Ventre L, Fallico M, Longo A, Parisi G, Russo A, Bonfiglio V, Marolo P, Caselgrandi P, Avitabile T, Borrelli E, Reibaldi M. CONVENTIONAL INTERNAL LIMITING MEMBRANE PEELING VERSUS INVERTED FLAP FOR SMALL-TO-MEDIUM IDIOPATHIC MACULAR HOLE: A Randomized Trial. Retina. 2022 Dec 1;42(12):2251-2257. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000003622. Epub 2022 Sep 6. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| peeling internal limiting membrane (ILM) |
| Procedure |
full thickness macular hole surgery |
|
Closure rate after primary vitrectomy for idiopathic full thickness macular holes with inverted flap technique versus internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling technique |
| 3 months |