Evidence Hub

The no-retina-touch technique: vitrectomy and platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of lamellar macular hole. New insights into pathogenesis

Ricardi F, Gelormini F, Parisi G, Vallino V, Borrelli E, Marolo P, D'Antico S, Salafia M et al.

Eye (London, England), 2025

3 citations

Abstract

Purpose: To explore the use of autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as a potential therapeutic adjuvant strategy for treating degenerative lamellar macular holes (LMHs).

Design: A prospective interventional case series.

Methods: Seven consecutive patients (8 eyes) with a diagnosis of LMH underwent a pars-plana vitrectomy with PRP injection under air tamponade. Anatomical results based on spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) and functional results, in terms of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and reading performance, were analyzed.

Results: At 12 months postoperatively, 7 out of 8 eyes (88%) presented a complete closure of the LMH. The ellipsoid zone (EZ) was restored in 3 eyes (37.5%). The mean (±SD) postoperative BCVA was 0.39 (±0.56) LogMAR, resulting in a statistically significant visual acuity improvement (p = 0.007). The mean (±SD) maximum reading speed (MaxRS) improved to 133.48 (±41.47) wpm, with a significant increase compared to the baseline (p = 0.029). The mean (±SD) reading acuity score (RA score) resulted in 0.44 (±0.04) LogRAD, with an improvement in reading acuity that did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.129).

Conclusions: The utilization of the PRP technique with a no-retina-touch approach safeguards the delicate retinal tissues, minimizing the possibility of iatrogenic trauma or post-operative complications, while maintaining a high rate of efficacy in enabling the improvement of the foveal defect in lamellar macular holes.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

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