Inverted Internal Limiting Membrane Flap Technique versus Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling for Large Macular Holes: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Abstract

Background: Vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling is an effective surgical procedure for the treatment of macular holes (MHs). However, there is a possibility of poor postoperative anatomical closure with conventional ILM peeling for MHs larger than 400 μm. Therefore, a novel inverted ILM flap technique was developed for such cases. Objectives: This meta-analysis study was performed to evaluate and compare the anatomical and visual outcomes of the inverted ILM flap technique and ILM peeling in large MHs. Methods: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The trial eligibility and risk of bias were assessed according to Cochrane review methods. The primary outcome measures included MH closure rate and postoperative visual acuity (VA). Subgroup analysis of postoperative VA based on follow-up time was also conducted. Pooled odds ratios (ORs), weighted mean difference (WMD), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. Results: Five RCTs with a total of 155 eyes in the inverted ILM flap group and 161 eyes in the ILM peeling group were included in this meta-analysis. Statistical meta-analysis revealed that the overall MH closure rate in the inverted ILM flap group was significantly higher than that in the ILM peeling group (OR = 3.10; 95% CI: 1.25–7.66; p = 0.01). The postoperative VA was significantly better in the inverted ILM flap group than the ILM peeling group (WMD = −0.14; 95% CI: −0.21 to −0.07; p = 0.0002). The subgroup meta-analysis indicated that the postoperative VA was significantly better in the inverted ILM flap group than the ILM peeling group (WMD = −0.17; 95% CI: −0.26 to −0.08; p = 0.0004) at the 3-month follow-up. However, no significant difference was observed between the 2 groups at the 6-month follow-up (WMD = −0.09; 95% CI: −0.20 to 0.02; p = 0.10). Conclusions: Vitrectomy with the inverted ILM flap technique showed a higher anatomical closure rate as well as visual gain – although only in the short term as no difference in visual recovery was found at the 6-month follow-up – than did ILM peeling in large MHs. The inverted ILM flap technique should be considered as a preferred and routine procedure for the treatment of patients with MHs larger than 400 µm.