Medizinische Universität Graz - Research portal

Go directly to the nagivation.
Go directly to the content.

Navigation/Search

Selected Publication:

SHR Neuro Cancer Cardio Lipid Metab Microb

Confalonieri, F; Haave, H; Binder, S; Bober, AM; Bragadottir, R; Baerland, T; Faber, R; Forsaa, V; Gonzalez-Lopez, JJ; Govetto, A; Haugstad, M; Ivastinovic, D; Jenko, NČ; Nicoară, SD; Kaljurand, K; Kozak, I; Kvanta, A; Lytvynchuk, L; Nawrocka, ZA; Pajic, SP; Petrovič, MG; Radecka, L; Rehak, M; Romano, MR; Ruban, A; Speckauskas, M; Stene-Johansen, I; Stranak, Z; Thaler, A; Thein, ASA; Theocharis, I; Tomic, Z; Yan, X; Zekolli, M; Zhuri, B; Znaor, L; Petrovski, BE; Kolko, M; Lumi, X; Petrovski, G.
Macular hole Delphi consensus statement (MHOST).
Acta Ophthalmol. 2023; 101(7):815-825 Doi: 10.1111/aos.15682
Web of Science PubMed FullText FullText_MUG

Co-authors Med Uni Graz: Ivastinovic Domagoj
Altmetrics:
Dimensions Citations:
Plum Analytics:
Scite (citation analytics):
Abstract:: PURPOSE: To derive a Delphi method-based consensus for the surgical management of Full Thickness Macular Hole (FTMH) and Lamellar Macular Hole (LMH). METHODS: 37 expert VR surgeons from 21 mainly European countries participated in Delphi method-based questionnaire for diagnosis and treatment of FTMHs and LMHs. RESULTS: A total of 36 items were rated in round 1 by 37 participants, of which 10 items achieved consensus: intraoperative verification of PVD; clinical superiority of OCT-based FTMH classification; practical ineffectiveness of ocriplasmin; circular 360° ILM peeling for small macular holes; use of regular surgical technique for the size of the hole in concomitant retinal detachment; performing complete vitrectomy; SF6 gas as preferred tamponade; cataract surgery if crystalline lens is mildly/moderately opaque; removal of both ILM and LHEP in LMH surgery. In round 2, 18 items with moderate consensus (45-70% agreement) in round 1 were rated by 35 participants. Final consensus was reached in 35% of questions related to both diagnosis and surgical procedures. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi study provides valuable information about the consensus/disagreement on different scenarios encountered during FTMH and LMH management as a guide tosurgical decision-making. High rate of disagreement and/or variable approaches still exist for treating such relatively common conditions.
Find related publications in this database (Keywords): DELPHI consensus statement; Full thickness macular hole (FTMH); Lamellar Macular Hole (LMH); surgical decision-making; surgical management