PARS PLANA VITRECTOMY WITH OR WITHOUT INTERNAL LIMITING MEMBRANE PEEL FOR MACULAR HOLE: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of pars plana vitrectomy with and without internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling for macular hole (MH). METHODS: A systematic literature search on Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar was performed from January 2000 to 2023. The primary outcome was the final best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA). Secondary outcomes included MH closure rates and the need for repeat surgery. The authors performed a random-effects meta-analysis on Review Manager 5.4. RESULTS: Fourteen studies on 880 eyes were included. Pars plana vitrectomy with and without ILM peel achieved a similar final BCVA ( P = 0.66). However, pars plana vitrectomy without ILM peeling achieved a significantly better final BCVA in eyes with closed MHs (WMD = 0.05 logMAR, 95% CI, 0.01-0.10, P = 0.02). Pars plana vitrectomy with ILM peeling achieved a significantly higher primary MH closure rate (RR = 1.21, 95% CI, 1.04-1.42, P = 0.02) and lower incidence of MH reoperation (RR = 0.19, 95% CI, 0.11-0.33, P < 0.001). The final MH closure rate ( P = 0.12) and incidence of MH recurrence ( P = 0.25) were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Pars plana vitrectomy with and without ILM peel achieved a similar final BCVA. However, pars plana vitrectomy without ILM peeling achieved a better final BCVA in eyes with closed MHs. ILM peeling achieved a greater primary MH closure rate and reduced need for reoperation.

Pars Plana Vitrectomy with or without Internal Limiting Membrane Peel for Epiretinal Membrane: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The safety and effectiveness of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling remains poorly understood for the treatment of epiretinal membrane (ERM). OBJECTIVES: Our study aims to compare the safety and effectiveness of PPV with and without ILM peeling for ERM. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted on Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar from January 2000 to January 2023 for comparative studies reporting visual and anatomical outcomes for patients with ERM that received PPV with or without ILM peeling. Primary outcomes included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at last study observation and change in BCVA from baseline. Secondary outcomes included retinal thickness (RT) at last study observation, change in RT from baseline, risk of ERM recurrence, and adverse events. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Risk of bias of randomized controlled trials was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool of observational studies using the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions-I tool. The certainty of evidence of outcomes was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. RESULTS: Nineteen studies reporting on 1,291 eyes at baseline were included. PPV with and without ILM peel achieved a similar BCVA at last study observation (p = 0.68) and change in BCVA from baseline (p = 0.79). These findings remained consistent irrespective of whether simultaneous phacoemulsification was performed. PPV with ILM peel achieved a significantly lower incidence of ERM recurrence (risk ratio [RR] = 0.26, 95% CI = [0.13, 0.51], p < 0.0001) and additional surgery (RR = 0.17, 95% CI = [0.04, 0.74], p = 0.02) compared to PPV without ILM peel. CONCLUSION: PPV with and without ILM peel achieved a similar BCVA at last study observation in ERM patients. Patients treated with PPV and ILM peel also had a reduced risk of ERM recurrence and lower reoperation risk. These conclusions are associated with a moderate certainty of evidence and potential for bias from multiple non-randomized studies.