Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the effect of different types of intraocular tamponade and different types of postoperative positioning on the closure of idiopathic macular hole (IMH). METHODS: Prospective randomized clinical trial enrolling 104 eyes of 100 patients (age, 57-87 years) undergoing MH surgery. All patients were operated on by an experienced surgeon using 25-gauge pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) and internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling. Patients were randomized according to the type of intraocular tamponade and postoperative positioning into the following four groups: SF6 + nonsupine reading position (n = 26) (group 1), air + nonsupine reading position (n = 25) (group 2), air + prone position (n = 26) (group 3), or SF6 + prone position (n = 27) (group 4). The follow-up period was 6 months. RESULTS: MH closure was achieved in 87 eyes (83.7 %) in the overall sample after the first surgery, with closure rates of 100%, 56%, 84.6%, and 92.6% in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The group 2 was significantly less successful compared to the other three groups (p < 0.05). MH of sizes ≤400 µm was closed in 97.2% of cases after the first surgery, with no significant differences between groups (p = 0.219). MH with sizes over 400 µm was closed in 70.9% of cases after the first surgery, with both groups with air tamponade being significantly less successful than group 1. The nonsupine reading position was subjected to a better subjective evaluation in terms of postoperative comfort and quality of sleep, with no differences between air and SF6 tamponade tolerance. CONCLUSION: PPV with ILM peeling, intraocular tamponade, and positioning remains the basic surgical approach in the treatment of IMH. For MH ≤ 400 µm, a high closure rate can be achieved by combining air tamponade and nonsupine reading position. For macular holes >400 µm, the greatest anatomical success can be achieved by using the SF6 tamponade in combination with the nonsupine reading position.