RATE AND SEVERITY OF EPIRETINAL MEMBRANE FORMATION AFTER SCLERAL BUCKLING SURGERY
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
PURPOSE: To investigate the rate and progression of epiretinal membrane (ERM) formation after scleral buckling (SB) for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. METHODS: A retrospective review of eyes undergoing SB for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment repair between January 2015 and June 2022 that developed ERM. ERM grading and structural analysis were performed using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) based on a standardized scheme. RESULTS: Among 1,064 eyes undergoing SB, 143 eyes (13.4%) developed ERM. Over a mean (SD) follow-up of 5.3 (2.6) years, most eyes (122/143, 85.3%) were observed, while 21 (14.7%) underwent membrane peeling at a mean (SD) of 13.2 (13.8) months post-SB. There was no statistically significant ERM stage predilection observed in the eyes that underwent membrane peeling. The observed eyes had mean (SD) logMAR VA [Snellen equivalent] of 0.51 (0.63) [20/65] at ERM diagnosis, 0.34 (0.39) [20/44] at 12 months post-ERM diagnosis ( P = 0.03), and 0.36 (0.43) [20/46] at final visit ( P = 0.03). In eyes that underwent membrane peeling, mean (SD) logMAR VA [Snellen equivalent] improved from 1.25 (0.69) [20/356] prepeel to 0.63 (0.71) [20/85] at final visit ( P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: ERM commonly develops after SB for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment repair. Most cases were mild stage and managed conservatively with vision improving over 5.3 years.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- RATE AND SEVERITY OF EPIRETINAL MEMBRANE FORMATION AFTER SCLERAL BUCKLING SURGERY
- Date Crossref
- 01/01/2026
- Éditeur
- Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.