Long-term follow-up of fellow eye in patients with lamellar macular hole
- 404 Downloads
To evaluate macular changes in fellow eyes of patients diagnosed with lamellar macular hole (LMH) using spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) and blue fundus autofluorescence (B-FAF).
Fellow eyes of patients diagnosed with a LMH were retrospectively evaluated on OCT. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central foveal thickness (CFT) were recorded. Corresponding B-FAF images, vitreo-macular relations, and type of epiretinal membranes (ERMs) were also examined.
Thirty-five patients were included. At baseline, six fellow eyes (17%) showed a normal foveal profile, 26 (74%) had a tractional ERM, and three cases (9%) revealed a bilateral LMH, one of them with a lamellar hole-associated epiretinal proliferation (LHEP). A posterior vitreous detachment (PVD) was present in 29 patients (83%), four (11%) had only a vitreo-papillary adhesion (VPA), and two (6%) had both vitreo-macular adhesion (VMA) and VPA. After a mean follow-up of 4.6 ± 1.9 years, one eye (3%) developed a vitreous detachment from the macula with persistent VPA, and one developed a PVD from a VPA with subsequent ERM formation.
BCVA and mean CFT remained stable in 35 eyes (100%). Likewise, no B-FAF signal variations were detected. One patient developed a LMH during the 3rd year of follow-up.
Our data suggest that the presence of a LMH in one eye does not increase significantly the risk of developing the same condition in the fellow eye after 4 years. Bilateral condition is uncommon, and an ERM is often detected in the fellow eye. LHEPs were not observed in fellow eyes with foveal integrity, and all LHEPs observed (in main and fellow eyes) were always associated with LMHs; this supports the hypothesis that LHEP is a consequence and not a causative factor for LMHs. The occurrence of a LMH in one fellow eye after 3 years follow-up may suggest that a higher incidence of bilateral disease could develop in a longer time span.
KeywordsLamellar macular hole Lamellar macular hole fellow eye Epiretinal proliferation Epiretinal membrane Vitreoretinal interface
Compliance with ethical standards
No funding was received for this research.
Conflict of interest
All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge, or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study, formal consent is not required.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 20.Witkin AJ, Castro LC, Reichel E, Rogers AH, Baumal CR, Duker JS (2010) Anatomic and visual outcomes of vitrectomy for lamellar macular holes. Ophthalmic Surg Laser Imaging 5:1–7Google Scholar