Dataset Information

Microperimetric Biofeedback Training after Successful Inverted Flap Technique for Large Macular Hole.

ABSTRACT: Background: Despite the high closure rate of large macular hole (LMH) after surgery, visual recovery is often worse than expected. Microperimetric biofeedback can improve visual function in macular pathologies. We evaluated the efficacy of biofeedback on macular function after successful inverted flap technique for LMH. Methods: In this prospective comparative study, 26 patients after LMH surgical closure were enrolled. The whole sample was equally divided into two groups. In Group 1 (trained), patients underwent a double cycle of microperimetric biofeedback, using structured light stimulus plus acoustic tone; in Group 2 (control), patients underwent scheduled visits. We analyzed visual acuity, retinal sensitivity at central 12° (macular sensitivity, MS) and 4° (central macular sensitivity, CMS), and fixation stability over twelve months. Results: Visual acuity improved mainly in the trained group, without any significant differences between the groups (p > 0.05). Only after training did MS significantly improve (p = 0.01). CMS more significantly improved in the trained (p < 0.001) than the control group (p < 0.01) (Group 1 vs. 2, p = 0.004). Only in the trained group did fixation significantly improve (3 months, p ? 0.03; 12 months, p ? 0.01). An equality test on matched data confirmed a greater significant improvement of CMS (p ? 0.02) at all follow-up and fixation (p ? 0.02) at last follow-up after training. Conclusion: Microperimetric biofeedback consolidates and increases the improvement of retinal sensitivity and fixation gained after successful inverted flap technique.

SUBMITTER: Sborgia G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7074367 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Microperimetric Biofeedback Training after Successful Inverted Flap Technique for Large Macular Hole.

Sborgia Giancarlo G Niro Alfredo A Tritto Tiziana T Albano Valeria V Sborgia Luigi L Sborgia Alessandra A Donghia Rossella R Giancipoli Ermete E Coassin Marco M Pastore Valentina V Giuliani Gianluigi G Lorenzi Umberto U Romano Mario R MR Boscia Francesco F Alessio Giovanni G

Journal of clinical medicine 20200218 2

<b>Background:</b> Despite the high closure rate of large macular hole (LMH) after surgery, visual recovery is often worse than expected. Microperimetric biofeedback can improve visual function in macular pathologies. We evaluated the efficacy of biofeedback on macular function after successful inverted flap technique for LMH. <b>Methods:</b> In this prospective comparative study, 26 patients after LMH surgical closure were enrolled. The whole sample was equally divided into two groups. In Group ...[more]

PMID: 32085592

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMicroperimetric biofeedback training improved visual acuity and fixation stability in patients who previously underwent macular surgery. We aimed to compare the functional results of biofeedback training with the standard of care in patients who underwent successful inverted Internal Limiting Membrane (ILM)-flap technique for high myopic macular holes (hMMH).MethodsThis was a retrospective, comparative, cohort study. Patients with hMMH after surgical hole closure underwent microperimetric biofeedback using structured light stimulus plus acoustic tone (n = 12; Biofeedback) or standard of care with scheduled visits (n = 11; Control). Best-corrected visual acuity, retinal sensitivity at central 12° (RS) and 4° (CRS) with a mean deviation at central 12° (MD), and fixation stability as bivariate contour ellipse area (BCEA 68%, 95%, and 99%) were assessed at baseline and month 1, 3, 6, and 12. The Mann-Whitney test was used to test the difference between the groups.ResultsBaseline functional parameters were not significantly different among the groups. BCVA significantly improved in each group (Biofeedback, p = 0.002; Control, p ≤ 0.02) at all follow-up visits. CRS significantly improved at 6 (p = 0.03) and 12 (p = 0.01) months in the Biofeedback group and at month 12 (p = 0.01) in the Control group. RS (p = 0.001) and MD (p = 0.005) improved at the last follow-up only in the trained group. After training, BCEA 68% and 95% significantly improved (6 and 12 months, p < 0.05). The Biofeedback group had better results in RS (p ≤ 0.02), CRS (p ≤ 0.02), and BCEA 68%, 95%, and 99% (p ≤ 0.01) compared to the Control at all follow-ups. BCVA and MD were better in the Biofeedback group at month 3 (p = 0.01), and month 3 (p = 0.01) and 12 (p = 0.003), respectively.ConclusionsMicroperimetric biofeedback can increase retinal sensitivity and stabilize fixation better than the standard care over months after a successful inverted ILM-flap for hMMH.

Project description:IntroductionInverted Internal Limiting Membrane (ILM)-flap technique demonstrated its effectiveness, in terms of anatomical closure rate and visual acuity recovery for high myopic macular holes. We evaluated macular function after a successful inverted ILM-flap for macular holes in high myopic eyes (hMMH) using microperimetry to predict visual prognosis.MethodsA retrospective study on 23 eyes of 23 patients after surgical closure of hMMH, was performed. All patients underwent inverted ILM-flap and gas tamponade. Cataract surgery was performed in phakic eyes. Study outcomes including best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), retinal sensitivity (RS) at central 12°, central retinal sensitivity (CRS) at central 4° and mean deviation (MD), and fixation behavior as bivariate contour ellipse area (BCEA, degrees2) measured by microperimetry, were evaluated over 6 months. A mixed-effects model was used to evaluate and compare the repeated measurements of outcomes between phakic and pseudophakic eyes. A regression model was performed to assess the relationship between BCVA at 6 months and independent variables.ResultsOverall mean BCVA improved from 0.98 ± 0.21 logMAR at baseline to 0.47 ± 0.31 logMAR at the last follow-up (p < 0.001). Over 6 months, overall sensitivity measurements improved (RS, p = 0.001; CRS, p < 0.0001; MD, p = 0.03), and the BCEA decreased in dimension, although not significantly (p ≥ 0.05). The mixed model revealed a significantly better effect of inverted ILM-flap combined with cataract surgery on BCVA and CRS in phakic eyes than inverted ILM-flap alone in pseudophakic ones. The regression model revealed a relationship of 6-month BCVA with pre-operative BCVA (β = 0.60, p = 0.02) and RS (β = -0.03, p = 0.01).ConclusionThe inverted ILM-flap technique significantly improved visual acuity and retinal sensitivity after the hMMH closure, particularly when combined with cataract extraction. Pre-operative visual acuity and retinal sensitivity at central 12° may predict post-surgical visual acuity.

Project description:BackgroundThe internal limiting membrane (ILM) insertion technique was widely used to treat large macular hole (MH) for the high closure rate. However, the prognosis of closed MH after ILM insertion compared to ILM peeling remains controversial. This study aimed to compare foveal microstructure and microperimeter in large idiopathic MH surgically closed by ILM peeling and ILM insertion.MethodsThis retrospective, non-randomized, comparative study included patients with idiopathic MH (minimum diameter ≥ 650 μm) who underwent primary pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with ILM peeling or ILM insertion. The initial closure rate was recorded. Patients with initially closed MHs were divided into two groups according to the surgery methods. The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), optical coherence tomography (OCT) and microperimeter-3 (MP-3) outcomes of two groups were compared at baseline, 1 and 4 months postoperatively.ResultsFor idiopathic MH (minimum diameter ≥ 650 μm), ILM insertion had a significantly higher initial closure rate than ILM peeling (71.19% vs. 97.62%, P = 0.001). Among 39 patients with initially closed MHs who were on regular follow-up, twenty-one were assigned to the ILM peeling group and 18 to the ILM insertion group. Postoperative BCVA improved significantly in both groups. The final BCVA (logMAR) (0.40 vs. 0.88, P < 0.001), macular hole sensitivity (19.66 dB vs. 14.14 dB, P < 0.001), peripheral sensitivity of macular hole (24.63 dB vs. 21.95 dB, P = 0.005), and fixation stability (FS) within 2 degrees (82.42% vs. 70.57%, P = 0.031) were significantly better and external limiting membrane (ELM) defect (330.14 μm vs. 788.28 μm, P < 0.001) and ellipsoid zone (EZ) defect (746.95 μm vs. 1105.11 μm, P = 0.010) were significantly smaller in the ILM peeling group than in the ILM insertion group.ConclusionFor initially closed MHs (minimum diameter ≥ 650 μm), both ILM peeling and ILM insertion significantly improved the microstructure and microperimeter in the fovea. However, ILM insertion was less efficient at microstructural and functional recovery after surgery.

Dataset Information

Microperimetric Biofeedback Training after Successful Inverted Flap Technique for Large Macular Hole.

Publications

Microperimetric Biofeedback Training after Successful Inverted Flap Technique for Large Macular Hole.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets