Comparison of clinical characteristics and factors affecting prognosis vision of idiopathic and myopic macular hole / 中华眼底病杂志

ABSTRACT

Objective:To compare the clinical characteristics and analyze the factors affecting vision prognosis of idiopathic macular hole (IMH) or myopic macular hole (MMH).Methods:A cross-sectional study. From October 2012 to October 2020, 336 patients with 346 eyes of IMH and MMH who were diagnosed in Shanxi Provincial Eye Hospital with continuous follow-up data after surgery were included. There were 346 eyes (336 cases), including IMH with 247 cases (255 eyes) and MMH with 89 cases (91 eyes), which were divided into IMH group and MMH group. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and optical coherence tomography were performed in all eyes. The BCVA examination used the standard logarithmic visual acuity chart, which was converted into logarithmic minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) visual acuity. The age of outset in IMH and MMH was 64.8±6.6 and 59.2±8.1 years, the logMAR BCVA was 1.11±0.50 and 1.80±0.78, respectively. There were significant differences in age ( Wald=34.507) and logMAR BCVA ( Z=-7.703) between two groups ( P<0.05). All eyes were performed inner limiting membrane (ILM) peeling or partial inverted ILM covering hole operation. After the operation, the vitreous cavity was filled with air, C 3F 8 and silicone oil, including 73, 102, 83 eyes in IMH group and 9, 10, 72 eyes in MMH group, respectively. Follow-up time after surgery was more than 2 months. The optimal BCVA and macular hole closure of the two groups were observed. If the quantitative data conformed to the normal distribution, the generalized estimating equation was used, otherwise, the Mann-Whitney U test or Kruskal-wallis test was used, the χ 2 test was used for the comparison of categorical variables. Generalized estimating equation logistic regression analyzed the influencing factors of optimal BCVA after surgery and visual acuity success. Results:In IMH and MMH, the optimal logMAR BCVA were 0.71±0.36, 1.10±0.51 respectively, and 147 (57.6%, 147/255) eyes, 63 (69.2%, 63/91) eyes achieved visual success respectively. There was a significant difference in the optimal logMAR BCVA ( Z=-6.803, P<0.005), but no difference in visual success rate ( χ2=3.772) between the two groups. The visual success rate of IMH at the same baseline BCVA level was higher than that of MMH, and the difference was statistically significant ( χ2=14.500, P=0.001). Logistic regression analysis showed that the influencing factors predicting poor optimal visual acuity after surgery were: IMH, baseline BCVA [odds ratio ( OR)=2.941, 95% confidence interval ( CI) 1.341-6.447, P<0.05], MH diameter ( OR=1.003, 95% CI 1.001-1.005, P<0.05), silicon oil filling ( OR=3.481, 95% CI 1.594-7.605, P<0.05); MMH, baseline BCVA ( OR=2.549, 95% CI 1.344-4.834, P<0.05), C 3F 8 filling ( OR=18.131, 95% CI 1.505-218.365, P<0.05) and silicon oil filling ( OR=7.796, 95% CI 0.997-60.944, P<0.05). The factors leading to a lower likelihood of achieving visual success: IMH, baseline BCVA ( OR=213.329, 95% CI 46.123-986.694, P<0.05), MH diameter ( OR=0.995, 95% CI 0.992-0.997, P<0.05), silicon oil filling ( OR=0.326, 95% CI 0.115-0.926, P<0.05) and duration ( OR=1.036, 95% CI 1.005-1.067, P<0.05); MMH, baseline BCVA ( OR=13.316, 95% CI 2.513-70.565, P<0.05) and duration ( OR=1.022, 95% CI 1.001-1.044, P<0.05). Conclusions:MMH was earlier than IMH in age of outset. Baseline vision significantly affected vision prognosis in IMH and MMH. Silicone oil should be avoided as much as possible under the premise of hole closure.