Background/aims: To evaluate the visual performance of patients with successful macular hole surgery with a minimum follow-up of 3 years. Results were compared with the performance of the healthy fellow eyes.
Methods: 15 patients were studied. The healthy fellow eyes of the patients (13 eyes) served as a control group. Age, gender and best-corrected logMAR visual acuity were recorded. Reading acuity (in log reading acuity determination (RAD), reading equivalent of logMAR) and speed were tested monocularly. Scotoma size was measured with SLO perimetry, and hole closure was confirmed with an OCT scan.
Results: The mean distance visual acuity of the operated eyes (logMAR 0.32 (SD 0.21)) was significantly lower than that of the healthy fellow eyes (logMAR 0.05 (0.17)), but significantly higher than preoperatively (logMAR 0.71 (0.32)). The mean reading acuity was logRAD 0.47 (0.25) for the operated eyes ( = 77.9% of logMAR), and statistically significantly higher (logRAD 0.16 (0.16)) for the fellow eyes ( = 89.4% of logMAR). The mean maximum reading speeds were comparable for the operated eyes (168.3 (23.1) words per minute (wpm)) and the fellow eyes (178.7 (26.1) wpm) (p = 0.3). Within logRAD 1.3 and 0.5, the mean reading speeds of the two groups were comparable, but critical print size (CPS) for the operated group (logRAD 0.7 (0.2)) was significantly worse than those for the fellow eyes (logRAD 0.4 (0.2)). The SLO analysis showed absence of absolute scotoma in 12 eyes.
Conclusion: Distance and reading acuity showed remaining deficits compared with the healthy fellow eyes; however, mean maximum reading speeds of the operated eyes achieved results comparable with healthy eyes. The results show a long-term benefit in the visual function of eyes with closed macular holes.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Competing interests: None.