Comparison of Anatomical and Visual Outcomes between Idiopathic and Myopic Macular Holes Using the Internal Limiting Membrane or Inverted Internal Limiting Membrane Flap Technique

Table 2

Anatomical and functional results in patients undergoing ILM peeling or inverted ILM flap technique in relationship with the axial length: AL < 26 mm or AL ≥ 26 mm.

Variables	ILM peeling technique			Inverted ILM flap technique
	AL < 26 mm (n = 25)	AL ≥ 26 mm (n = 14)		AL < 26 mm (n = 15)	AL ≥ 26 mm (n = 12)
Macular hole
Open	0	2 (14)	0.012	1 (7)	1 (8.3)	1.000
Closed at 6 months	25 (100)	12 (86)		14 (93)	11 (91.7)
Chronic MH
Closed	7/7 (100)	0/1	—	3/4 (75)	4/5 (80)	1.000
Restoration of ELM/ellipsoid zone at 6 months	19/25 (76)	5/12 (42)	0.168	5/14 (36)	5/11 (45)	0.697
BCVA (logMAR), median (IQR)
At 6 months	0.22 (0.3–0.1)	0.4 (0.7–0.22)	0.042	0.4 (0.7–0.3)	0.4 (0.85–0.3)	0.652
BCVA (Snellen chart), median (IQR)
At 6 months	20/32 (20/40–20/25)	20/50 (20/100–20/32)	0.138	20/50 (20/100–20/40)	20/50 (20/141–20/39)	0.652
Increased BCVA
At 6 months	19 (76)	10 (71)	0.142	13 (87)	6 (50)	0.031
Increased or stable BCVA
At 6 months	25 (100)	12 (86)	0.123	15 (100)	9 (75)	0.075

AL, axial length; BCVA, best-corrected visual acuity; ELM, external limiting membrane; ILM, internal limiting membrane; MH, macular hole.