This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

More Data Needed

Argye Hillis, PhD; Stuart L. Fine, MD

Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115(1):112.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

MACULAR HOLES are a common cause of visual impairment. The randomized trial performed by Freeman et al¹ for the Vitrectomy for Treatment of Macular Hole Study Group provides several pieces of important information about this prevalent condition. The results confirm that a large proportion of stage 3 and 4 macular holes close after vitrectomy, that such closure can occur even after a long duration, and that the anatomical results depend on the size and duration of the hole. The difference between the eyes assigned to vitrectomy (69% closure) and control eyes (4% closure) is statistically significant. The question then becomes whether this anatomical result translates into clinical visual improvement. The clinical results are mixed; improvements in visual acuity and serious adverse events were more common in the operated on eyes than in the control eyes, and both of these changes occurred in less than one quarter of these eyes. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Temple, Tex; Philadelphia, Pa

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?