Evidence Hub

Facedown Positioning in Macular Hole Surgery: A Systematic Review and Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis

R. Raimondi, N. Tzoumas, Steven Toh, Gurkaran S. Sarohia, Mark R. Phillips, Varun Chaudhary, David H. Steel

Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.), 2024

16 citations

Abstract

TOPIC

To assess the anatomical and visual effects of facedown positioning (FDP) advice in patients undergoing vitrectomy with gas tamponade for idiopathic full-thickness macular holes (FTMHs), and to explore differential treatment effects by macular hole size and FDP duration.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The necessity and duration of FDP for FTMH closure remain contentious, with no consensus guidelines.

METHODS

Prospectively registered systematic review and individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing FDP to no FDP (nFDP) across the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases and clinical trial registries from January 2000 to March 2023 (CRD42023395152). All adults with idiopathic FTMHs undergoing vitrectomy with gas tamponade were included. The main outcomes were primary macular hole closure and post-operative visual acuity at 6 months or nearest time point.

RESULTS

Of 8 eligible trials, 5 contributed IPD for 379 eyes and were included in our analysis. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) for primary closure with FDP versus nFDP was 2.41 (95% CI 0.98 to 5.93, P = 0.06) [GRADE: Low], translating to a relative risk (RR) of 1.08 (1.00 to 1.11) and a number needed to treat (NNT) of 15. The FDP group exhibited a mean improvement in post-operative visual acuity of -0.08 logMAR (-0.13 to -0.02, P = 0.006) [GRADE: Low] compared to the nFDP group. Benefits were more certain in participants with larger holes of minimum linear diameter ≥ 400 μm: adjusted OR…

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