Comparison on clinical efficacy of surgical treatment and conservative treatment for traumatic macular hole

Abstract

Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of surgical and conservative therapy in patients with traumatic macular hole. Methods The data of 56 eyes of 56 cases with traumatic macular hole were retrospectively analysed. Thirty cases were rondomly selected as surgical group, and treated with vitrectomy, internal limiting membrane peeling and C3F8 gas tamponade. Twenty-six cases of the same period were used as control group, and treated with conservative therapy. The visual acuity and macular hole diameter after treatment between the two groups were compared and analyzed. Results All patients were followed up for 3-6 months, average (4.6±0.5). The hole closed in 26 cases (86.7%), visual acuity improved in 15 cases (50%) at the last follow-up time in surgical group. The control group were 11 cases (39.3%) and 12 cases (46.2%) accordingly. The closure rate of macular hole in the surgical group was better than that of the conservative group (χ2=10.327, P=0.001), but there was no significant difference in visual acuity between two groups. Conclusion Surgical treatment is helpful to improve the closure rate of traumatic macular hole, but the improvement of visual acuity is not obvious. Key words: Macular hole, traumatic; Surgery; Drug therapy; Visual acuity