Myopic Traction Maculopathy: consensus from the Myopia Society for a new nomenclature

Le résumé fourni par la source

PURPOSE: To establish a standardized, clinically relevant nomenclature for myopic traction maculopathy (MTM) that prioritizes lesions based on visual impact and potential prognostic significance. DESIGN: International consensus meeting PARTICIPANTS: Panel of myopia and retinal imaging experts selected by the Myopia Society. METHODS: An international group of experts from the Myopia Society systematically evaluated existing MTM classification systems and their limitations. The panel integrated recent OCT findings to develop a hierarchical nomenclature reflecting disease severity and visual prognosis. The proposed system underwent validation through multi-observer agreement testing to ensure clinical reliability and reproducibility. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Development of a validated nomenclature that accurately describes MTM pathology, predicts visual outcomes, guides clinical management decisions, and facilitates standardized research reporting. RESULTS: The consensus panel identified four primary MTM manifestations arranged in descending order of severity: (1) macular detachment (2) full-thickness macular hole (3) lamellar macular hole (4) retinoschisis. When reporting MTM, the term "myopic" precedes the most severe lesion, followed by any associated lesions in the order of severity (e.g., "myopic macular detachment with full-thickness hole and schisis"). The panel also established specific OCT imaging protocols to standardize diagnosis and progression monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: This new OCT-based anatomical nomenclature for MTM complements existing classification systems by emphasizing clinically relevant, founded in up-to-date imaging-based evidence, and intended to standardize lesion descriptions. By providing a standardized framework for describing complex MTM lesions, the system may help clinicians monitor disease progression and may enable more consistent outcomes reporting in clinical research. Its adoption in future studies should enhance research comparability and support ongoing efforts to improve patient care.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.