Evidence Hub

Internal Limiting Membrane Flaps in Macular Hole Surgery: A Systematic Review and Individual Participant Data Meta-analysis

N. Tzoumas, Thomas W. McNally, Boon Lin Teh, Michele Zaman, David Yorston, Noemi Lois, Varun Chaudhary, David H. Steel

Ophthalmology Retina, 2025

9 citations

Abstract

TOPIC

To compare anatomic and visual outcomes of internal limiting membrane (ILM) flaps versus peeling in macular hole surgery. We also assessed the impact of hole size, symptom duration, and different flap types on outcomes.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The benefit of ILM flaps over standard ILM peeling in idiopathic, full-thickness macular holes (iFTMHs) remains unclear.

METHODS

Prospectively registered systematic review and individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing conventional ILM peeling with ILM flaps, as well different ILM flap subtypes, in adults undergoing primary iFTMH surgery (CRD42023494971). No exclusions were made based on hole size, symptom duration, or perioperative choices. Searches were performed in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and trial registries (January 2000-March 2023). Critical outcomes were hole closure and postoperative visual acuity at 6 months or nearest time point. Multilevel regression models were adjusted for age, sex, hole size, lens status, and preoperative visual acuity, allowing for non-linear effects. Evidence was appraised with Cochrane Risk of Bias, GRADE, and ICEMAN tools. Subgroup analyses considered hole size, symptom duration, flap subtypes, tamponade choice, and risk-of-bias.

RESULTS

Of 14 eligible trials, 13 provided IPD for 792 eyes. Most (68.3%) had MLD ≥500 μm, with limited representation of holes <400 μm and ≥900 μm. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) for primary closure with ILM flap…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free