Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Results of macular pucker surgery: 1- and 5-year follow-up

  • Retinal Disorders
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Although macular pucker removal in patients with metamorphopsia due to a macular pucker is a traditional elective vitreoretinal indication, we found that patients were not uniformly satisfied after surgery. We wished to study outcome in vision and metamorphopsia in patients undergoing macular pucker surgery, to assess changes between 1- and 5-year follow-up, as well as patient satisfaction at 5 years.

Methods

We assessed 107 consecutive patients undergoing macular pucker surgery and subsequent cataract surgery when not already pseudophakic. Early Treatment of Diabetes Study (EDTRS) vision and Sine Amsler Chart metamorphopsia grading were assessed before surgery and 1 year postop in 107 patients. In 57 patients we obtained a 5-year vision, metamorphopsia grading and a response to a questionnaire.

Results

After 1 year, mean vision had improved 2 ETDRS lines and metamorphopsia had decreased in 83% of the patients. The 57 patients returning for the 5-year follow-up and questionnaire had a statistically significantly greater improvement in vision at 1 year than those who did not return. In these 57 patients, a further mean increase of 1 ETDRS line had occurred, as well as a further decrease in metamorphopsia in one third of the patients. Forty of 57 patients (70%) indicated that they would elect to have surgery again. Reasons for not returning after 5 years, however, were probably related to dissatisfaction in at least one third of patients.

Conclusions

Although macular pucker surgery resulted in an increase in vision and a decrease of metamorphopsia in 83% of patients after 1 year, we assume, based on the biased patient sample we questioned after 5 years, that subjective assessment would be positive in only a small majority of the patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Arimura E, Matsumoto C, Okuyama S, Takada S, Hashimoto S, Shimomura Y (2005) Retinal contraction and metamorphopsia scores in eyes with idiopathic epiretinal membrane. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 46(8):2961–2966, doi:10.1167/iovs.04-1104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Arndt C, Rebollo O, Seguinet S, Debruyne P, Caputo G (2007) Quantification of metamorphopsia in patients with epiretinal membranes before and after surgery. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 245(8):1123–1129, doi:10.1007/s00417-006-0505-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bouwens MD, Van Meurs JC (2003) Sine Amsler Charts: a new method for the follow-up of metamorphopsia in patients undergoing macular pucker surgery. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 241(2):89–93, doi:10.1007/s00417-002-0613-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. de Bustros S, Thompson JT, Michels RG, Rice TA, Glaser BM (1988) Vitrectomy for idiopathic epiretinal membranes causing macular pucker. Br J Ophthalmol 72(9):692–695, doi:10.1136/bjo.72.9.692

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Geerts L, Pertile G, van de Sompel W, Moreels T, Claes C (2004) Vitrectomy for epiretinal membranes: visual outcome and prognostic criteria. Bull Soc Belge Ophtalmol 293:7–15

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ghazi-Nouri SM, Tranos PG, Rubin GS, Adams ZC, Charteris DG (2006) Visual function and quality of life following vitrectomy and epiretinal membrane peel surgery. Br J Ophthalmol 90(5):559–562, doi:10.1136/bjo.2005.085142

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Green WR, Kenyon KR, Michels RG, Gilbert HD (1979) Ultrastructure of epiretinal membranes causing macular pucker after retinal re-attachment surgery. Trans Ophthalmol Soc U K 99(1):65–77

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hirneiss C, Neubauer AS, Gass CA, Reiniger IW, Priglinger SG, Kampik A et al (2007) Visual quality of life after macular hole surgery: outcome and predictive factors. Br J Ophthalmol 91(4):481–484, doi:10.1136/bjo.2006.102376

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hirneiss C, Rombold F, Kampik A, Neubauer AS (2006) Visual quality of life after vitreoretinal surgery for epiretinal membranes. Ophthalmologe 103(2):109–113, doi:10.1007/s00347-005-1252-0

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Massin P, Allouch C, Haouchine B, Metge F, Paques M, Tangui L et al (2000) Optical coherence tomography of idiopathic macular epiretinal membranes before and after surgery. Am J Ophthalmol 130(6):732–739, doi:10.1016/S0002-9394(00)00574-2

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Massin P, Paques M, Masri H, Haouchine B, Erginay A, Blain P et al (1999) Visual outcome of surgery for epiretinal membranes with macular pseudoholes. Ophthalmology 106(3):580–585, doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(99)90119-7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Matsumoto C, Arimura E, Okuyama S, Takada S, Hashimoto S, Shimomura Y (2003) Quantification of metamorphopsia in patients with epiretinal membranes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44(9):4012–4016, doi:10.1167/iovs.03-0117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. McCarty DJ, Mukesh BN, Chikani V, Wang JJ, Mitchell P, Taylor HR et al (2005) Prevalence and associations of epiretinal membranes in the visual impairment project. Am J Ophthalmol 140(2):288–294

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. McDonald HR, Harris MJ (1988) Operating microscope-induced retinal phototoxicity during pars plana vitrectomy. Arch Ophthalmol 106(4):521–523

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Michels M, Lewis H, Abrams GW, Han DP, Mieler WF, Neitz J (1992) Macular phototoxicity caused by fiberoptic endoillumination during pars plana vitrectomy. Am J Ophthalmol 114(3):287–296

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Michels RG (1984) Vitrectomy for macular pucker. Ophthalmology 91(11):1384–1388

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Mitchell P, Smith W, Chey T, Wang JJ, Chang A (1997) Prevalence and associations of epiretinal membranes. The Blue Mountains Eye Study, Australia. Ophthalmology 104(6):1033–1040

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Tilanus MA, Cuypers MH, Bemelmans NA, Pinckers AJ (1997) Prognostic value of pattern reversal visual-evoked potentials in idiopathic epiretinal membrane. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 235(8):474–479, doi:10.1007/BF00947002

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Van Den Biesen PR, Berenschot T, Verdaasdonk RM, van Weelden H, van Norren D (2000) Endoillumination during vitrectomy and phototoxicity thresholds. Br J Ophthalmol 84(12):1372–1375, doi:10.1136/bjo.84.12.1372

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Van Meurs JC, Mertens DA, Peperkamp E, Post J (1993) Five-year results of vitrectomy and silicone oil in patients with proliferative vitreoretinopathy. Retina 13(4):285–289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Welch JC (1997) Dehydration injury as a possible cause of visual field defect after pars plana vitrectomy for macular hole. Am J Ophthalmol 124(5):698–699

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Wimpissinger B, Binder S (2007) Entry-site-related retinal detachment after pars plana vitrectomy. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 85(7):782–785, doi:10.1111/j.1600-0420.2007.00930.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Vitreoretinal Department, The Rotterdam Eye Hospital, Schiedamsevest 180, 3011 BH, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    M. Dimitri Bouwens & Floris de Jong

  2. Vitreoretinal Department, The Rotterdam Eye Hospital and Erasmus Medical Center, Schiedamsevest 180, 3011 BH, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Jan C. van Meurs

  3. Departent of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Paul Mulder

Authors
  1. M. Dimitri Bouwens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Floris de Jong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul Mulder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jan C. van Meurs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan C. van Meurs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bouwens, M.D., de Jong, F., Mulder, P. et al. Results of macular pucker surgery: 1- and 5-year follow-up. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 246, 1693–1697 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-008-0909-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-008-0909-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation