Authors: Jan Rambousek; Miroslav Veith; Martin Penčák; Zbyněk Straňák; Adam Ernest; Pavel Studený Authors place of work: Department of Ophthalmology, 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, and University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Czech Republic Published in the journal: Čes. a slov. Oftal., 82, 2026, No. 3, p. 141-147 Category: Původní práce doi: https://doi.org/10.31348/2025/45
Aims: The aim of the study was to describe a cohort of patients reoperated on for persistent primary macular hole, and to evaluate the anatomical and functional results of the reoperated patients.
Material and Methods: 459 eyes of 390 patients were operated on for primary macular hole at Department of Ophthalmology, 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Kralovske Vinohrady University Hospital between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2023. We included 33 eyes of 33 patients in our retrospective case series, in which macular hole persisted after the primary surgery. Preoperative, perioperative and postoperative data of these patients were recorded, as well as initial and resulting best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), surgical technique, whether the first or second reoperation was successful. The minimum follow-up time was 90 days after the revision surgery. The statistical analysis included descriptive statistics to characterize the demographic and clinical parameters. Qualitative and quantitative variables were analyzed using means, medians and standard deviations.
Results: Primary surgery for macular holes was successful in 426 eyes of 357 patients (92.8%). The surgery was unsuccessful in the remaining 33 eyes of 33 patients (7.2%), with persistent macular hole. These patients underwent reoperation, which led to closure of the hole in 27 of 33 eyes (reoperation success rate 81.8% and total success rate of primary surgery and reoperation altogether 98.7%). Reoperation was unsuccessful in 6 eyes (18.2% of reoperated eyes and 1.3% of all operated macular holes). In 4 eyes a second reoperation was performed; in 3 eyes the reoperation was successful and led to an improvement of BCVA. The average BCVA of the successfully reoperated eyes was 65.2 ± 11.9 letters (ETDRS ±SD). In the eyes of patients after a successful second reoperation, BCVA was 56.7 ±8.4 letters, while in the eyes of patients who did not undergo further surgery (n = 3), average BCVA was only 39.0 ±11.0 letters.
Conclusion: Reoperation of macular holes has a very good success rate and usually leads to an improvement of visual acuity. Improvement of visual acuity can also be achieved in patients who only achieved success after a second reoperation.
Pars plana vitrectomy – revision surgery – ILM peeling – persistent and recurrent macular hole
1. McCannel CA, Ensminger JL, Diehl NN, Hodge DN. Population-based incidence of macular holes. Ophthalmology. 2009;116(7):1366-1369. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.01.052
2. Gass JD. Reappraisal of biomicroscopic classification of stages of development of a macular hole. Am J Ophthalmol. 1995;119(6):752 - 759. doi:10.1016/s0002-9394(14)72781-3
3. The Royal College of Ophthalmologists. Draft clinical guideline on idiopathic full-thickness macular holes [David Steel, chair] [Internet]. London (UK): The Royal College of Ophthalmologists; 2024 Oct [cited 2025 Aug 2]. Available from: https://www.rcophth.ac.uk/ wp-content/uploads/2024/10/DRAFT-clinical-guideline-on-idiopathic-full-thickness-macular-holes.pdf
4. Yu BE, Sheidow T, Sambhi RS, Hooper P, Malvankar-Mehta MS. The effectiveness of ocriplasmin versus surgery for the treatment of macular holes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2021 Jul;31(4):2003-2012. Epub 2020 Jul 30. doi: 10.1177/1120672120946925
5. Kim SJ, Lim JI, Bailey ST, et al. American Academy of Ophthalmology Preferred Practice Pattern Retina/Vitreous Committee. Idiopathic Macular Hole Preferred Practice Pattern®. Ophthalmology. 2025 Apr;132(4):P234-P269. Epub 2025 Feb 7. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.12.021.
6. Duker JS, Kaiser PK, Binder S, et al. The International Vitreomacular Traction Study Group classification of vitreomacular adhesion, traction, and macular hole. Ophthalmology. 2013 Dec;120(12):2611 - 2619. Epub 2013 Sep 17. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.07.042
7. Ruiz-Moreno JM, Staicu C, Piñero DP, Montero J, Lugo F, Amat P. Optical coherence tomography predictive factors for macular hole surgery outcome. Br J Ophthalmol. 2008 May;92(5):640-644. doi: 10.1136/bjo.2007.136176
8. Bae K, Kang SW, Kim JH, Kim SJ, Kim JM, Yoon JM. Extent of Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling and its Impact on Macular Hole Surgery Outcomes: A Randomized Trial. Am J Ophthalmol. 2016 Sep;169 : 179-188. Epub 2016 Jul 5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo. 2016.06.041
9. Li Y, Jin S, Shi L, Qin H, Zhao J. Factors Associated with Anatomic Failure and Hole Reopening after Macular Hole Surgery. J Ophthalmol. 2021 Dec 7;2021 : 7861180. doi: 10.1155/2021/7861180
10. Steel DH, Donachie PHJ, Aylward GW, et al. BEAVRS Macular hole outcome group. Factors affecting anatomical and visual outcome after macular hole surgery: findings from a large prospective UK cohort. Eye (Lond). 2021 Jan;35(1):316-325. Epub 2020 Mar 30. doi: 10.1038/s41433-020-0844-x
11. Zhao PP, Wang S, Liu N, Shu ZM, Zhao JS. A Review of Surgical Outcomes and Advances for Macular Holes. J Ophthalmol. 2018 Apr 18;2018 : 7389412. doi: 10.1155/2018/7389412
12. Lachance A, You E, Garneau J, et al. Revision Surgery for Idiopathic Macular Hole after Failed Primary Vitrectomy. J Ophthalmol. 2021 Jan 7;2021 : 8832538. doi: 10.1155/2021/8832538
13. Che X, He F, Lu L, Zhu D, Xu X, Song X, Fan X, Wang Z. Evaluation of secondary surgery to enlarge the peeling of the internal limiting membrane following the failed surgery of idiopathic macular holes. Exp Ther Med. 2014 Mar;7(3):742-746. Epub 2014 Jan 7. doi: 10.3892/etm.2014.1477
14. Fung NSK, Mak AKH, Yiu R, Wong IYH, Lam WC. Treatment of large, chronic and persistent macular hole with internal limiting membrane transposition and tuck technique. Int J Retina Vitreous. 2020 Mar 9;6 : 3. doi: 10.1186/s40942-019-0206-7
15. Cisiecki S, Bonińska K, Bednarski M. Autologous Lens Capsule Flap Transplantation for Persistent Macular Holes. J Ophthalmol. 2021 Feb 27;2021 : 8148792. doi: 10.1155/2021/8148792 16. Bamberger MD, Felfeli T, Politis M, Mandelcorn ED, Galic IJ, Chen JC. Human Amniotic Membrane Plug for Chronic or Persistent Macular Holes. Ophthalmol Retina. 2022 May;6(5):431-433. Epub 2022 Jan 17. doi: 10.1016/j.oret.2022.01.006
17. Hejsek L, Stepanov A, Dusova J, Jiraskova N. Reoperation of idiopathic macular hole. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub. 2014;158(4):596-599. doi:10.5507/bp.2013.088
18. Shi Y, Feng L, Li Y, et al. Outcomes of revision surgery for idiopathic macular hole after failed primary vitrectomy. Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 Jul 27;10 : 1169776. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1169776
19. Cillino S, Cillino G, Ferraro LL, Casuccio A. Treatment of persistently open macular holes with heavy silicone oil (Densiron 68) versus C2f6. A Prospective Randomized Study. Retina. 2016 Apr;36(4):688 - 694. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000000781
20. Veith, M. Chirurgické řešení idiopatické makulární díry s použitím různých typů tamponád a různého režimu pooperačního polohování [online]. Defended dissertation thesis. Hradec Králové: Univerzita Karlova, Lékařská fakulta v Hradci Králové, 9. 9. 2020 [cit. 2025-08-16]. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11956/120791
21. Moisseiev E, Fabian ID, Moisseiev J, Barak A. Outcomes of repeated pars plana vitrectomy for persistent macular holes. Retina. 2013 Jun;33(6):1137-1143. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0b013e31828076c5
22. Baumann C, El-Faouri M, Ivanova T, et al. Manchester revisional macular hole study: predictive value of optical coherence tomography parameters on outcomes of repeat vitrectomy, extension of internal limiting membrane peel, and gas tamponade for persistent macular holes. Retina. 2021 May;41(5):908-914. doi:10.1097/IAE.0000000000002959
23. D’Souza MJJ, Chaudhary V, Devenyi R, Kertes PJ, Lam W-Ch. Re-operation after ILM peel in idiopathic full-thickness macular holes. Br J Ophthalmol. 2011;95(11):1564-1567. doi:10.1136/bjo.2010.195826
Nemáte účet? Registrujte sa
Zadajte e-mailovú adresu, s ktorou ste vytvárali účet. Budú Vám na ňu zasielané informácie k nastaveniu nového hesla.
