Analysis of Leading Diseases Causing Epiretinal Membrane and Comparison of Prognosis after Epiretinal Membrane Peeling

Chang Hoon Lee; Eui Yong Kweon; Nam Cheon Cho; Woo Jin Kim

doi:10.3341/jkos.2015.56.10.1586

Journal List > J Korean Ophthalmol Soc > v.56(10) > 1010114

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Lee, Kweon, Cho, and Kim: Analysis of Leading Diseases Causing Epiretinal Membrane and Comparison of Prognosis after Epiretinal Membrane Peeling

Original Article

J Korean Ophthalmol Soc 2015;56(10):1586-1590.

Published online: 29 August 2015

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2015.56.10.1586

Analysis of Leading Diseases Causing Epiretinal Membrane and Comparison of Prognosis after Epiretinal Membrane Peeling

Chang Hoon Lee, M.D, Eui Yong Kweon, M.D, PhD, Nam Cheon Cho, M.D, PhD, Woo Jin Kim, M.D

Department of Ophthalmology, Chonbuk National University Medical School, Jeonju, Korea

Address reprint requests to Woo Jin Kim, MD Department of Ophthalmology, Chonbuk National University Hospital, #20 Geonji-ro, Deokjin-gu, Jeonju 54907, Korea Tel: 82-63-250-1965, Fax: 82-63-250-1960 E-mail: alberts123@hanmail.net

Received 13 March 20153 June 2015 Accepted 23 July 2015

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

In the present study we analyzed the leading diseases causing epiretinal membrane and compared the prognosis after epiretinal membrane peeling.

Methods

We enrolled 158 (160 eyes) patients diagnosed with epiretinal membrane who underwent epiretinal membrane peel-ing from January 2005 to January 2014. The medical records including age, underlying ocular disease, and pre-operative symp-toms of patients from Chonbuk National University Hospital were analyzed retrospectively. Additionally, we evaluated the changes in central macular thickness and visual acuity after the epiretinal membrane peeling.

Results

Idiopathic epiretinal membrane was the most common type of disease (44.4%, 71/160). The causes of secondary epi-retinal membrane were diabetic retinopathy (20.6%, 33/160), retinal tear, and retinal hole (18.1%, 29/160). Other causes were post retinal detachment surgery, traumatic epiretinal membrane, retinal vein occlusion and uveitis; 6.9% (11/160), 4.4% (7/160), 3.8% (6/160), and 1.9% (3/160), respectively. The changes in central macular thickness after surgery did not differ significantly between the idiopathic epiretinal membrane and secondary epiretinal membrane patients after adjusting for age ( p = 0.958, based on analysis of variance (ANOVA). Additionally, the visual acuity did not differ significantly after the surgery even after ad-justing for age ( p = 0.118, analysis of covariance [ANCOVA]).

Conclusions

Various ocular diseases can be the leading causes of epiretinal membrane, but the leading disease does not affect the degree of central macular thickness changes after surgery or change the prognosis of post-surgical visual acuity.

Keywords: Central retinal thickness, Epiretinal membrane, Retinal tear

References

1. Koutsandrea CN, Apostolopoulos MN, Alonistiotis DA. . Indocyanine green-assisted epiretinal membrane peeling evaluated by optical coherence tomography and multifocal electroretinography. Clin Ophthalmol. 2007; 1:535–44.

2. Smiddy WE, Maquire AM, Green WR. . Idiopathic epiretinal membranes. Ultrastructural characteristics and clinicopathologic correlation. Ophthalmology. 1989; 96:811–20. discussion 821.

3. de Bustros S, Rice TA, Michels RG. . Vitrectomy for macular pucker. Use after treatment of retinal tears or retinal detachment. Arch Ophthalmol. 1988; 106:758–60.

4. Ando F, Ohba N, Touura K, Hirose H. Anatomical and visual out-comes after episcleral macular buckling compared with those after pars plana vitrectomy for retinal detachment caused by macular hole in highly myopic eyes. Retina. 2007; 27:37–44.

5. Appiah AP, Hirose T. Secondary causes of premacular fibrosis. Ophthalmology. 1989; 96:389–92.

6. Yoshimura T, Sonoda KH, Sugahara M. . Comprehensive anal-ysis of inflammatory immune mediators in vitreoretinal diseases. PLoS One. 2009; 4:e8158.

7. Grewing R, Mester U. Results of surgery for epiretinal membranes and their recurrences. Br J Ophthalmol. 1996; 80:323–6.

8. Donati G, Kapetanios AD, Pournaras CJ. Complications of surgery for epiretinal membranes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1998; 236:739–46.

9. Niwa T, Terasaki H, Kondo M. . Function and morphology of macula before and after removal of idiopathic epiretinal membrane. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003; 44:1652–6.

10. Park DW, Dugel PU, Garda J. . Macular pucker removal with and without internal limiting membrane peeling: pilot study. Ophthalmology. 2003; 110:62–4.

11. Pesin SR, Olk RJ, Grand MG. . Vitrectomy for premacular fibroplasia. Prognostic factors, long-term follow-up, and time course of visual improvement. Ophthalmology. 1991; 98:1109–14.

12. Kang KT, Kim KS, Kim YC. Surgical reults of idiopathic and sec-ondary epiretinal membrane. Int Ophthalmol. 2014; 34:1227–32.

13. Duan XR, Liang YB, Friedman DS. . Prevalence and associa-tions of epiretinal membranes in a rural Chinese adult population: the Handan Eye Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009; 50:2018–23.

14. Yazici AT, Alagöz N, Celik HU. . Idiopathic and secondary epi-retinal membranes: do they differ in terms of morphology? An op-tical coherence tomography-based study. Retina. 2011; 31:779–84.

15. Kim J, Rhee KM, Woo SJ. . Long-term temporal changes of macular thickness and visual outcome after vitrectomy for idio-pathic epiretinal membrane. Am J Ophthalmol. 2010; 150:701–9.e1.

Table 1.

Dermographic features and baseline characteristics

	Idiopathic	DR	Retinal tear	Post RRD operation	p-value^*
Sex
Male	40	13	17	6
Female	31	20	10	5
Mean ages (years)	66.7 ± 7.2	60.8 ± 13.1	56.1 ± 12.5	53.8 ± 9.3
N (%)	71 (44.4)	33 (20.6)	29 (18.1)	11 (6.9)
	RVO	Trauma	Uveitis
Sex
Male	3	4	2
Female	3	3	1
Mean ages (years)	58.7 ± 16.8	52.8 ± 12.5	66.0 ± 13.1		0.002
N (%)	6 (3.8)	7 (4.4)	3 (1.9)		160 (100)

Values are presented as mean ± SD unless otherwise indicated. DR = diabetic retinopathy; RRD = rhegmatogenous retinal detachment; RVO = retinal vein occlusion.

^* Analyzed by ANOVA.

Table 2.

Visual acuity (log MAR) before and after epiretinal membrane peeling (age adjusted)

	Idiopathic	DR	Retinal tear	RVO	Post RRD operation	Trauma	p-value^*
V.A. before	0.65 ± 0.38	0.78 ± 0.37	0.45 ± 0.28	0.70 ± 0.64	0.78 ± 0.39	0.87 ± 0.56	0.121
V.A. after	0.50 ± 0.37	0.70 ± 0.58	0.35 ± 0.38	0.41 ± 0.40	0.75 ± 0.43	0.51 ± 0.16	0.118

Values are presented as mean ± SD unless otherwise indicated. V.A. = visual acuity; DR = diabetic retinopathy; RVO = retinal vein occlusion; RRD = rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.

^* Analyzed by ANCOVA (age adjust).

Table 3.

Central retinal thickness before epiretinal membrane peeling (age adjusted)

	Idiopathic	DR	Retinal tear	RVO	Post RRD operation	Trauma	p-value^*
CRT (μ m)	475 ± 121	396 ± 117	465 ± 107	409 ± 63	429 ± 99	457 ± 123	0.220

Values are presented as mean ± SD unless otherwise indicated. CRT = central macular thickness; DR = diabetic retinopathy; RVO = retinal vein occlusion; RRD = rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.

^* Analyzed by ANCOVA.

Table 4.

Change of central retinal thickness between before ERMP and after ERMP (age adjusted)

	Idiopathic	DR	Retinal tear	RVO	Post RRD operation	Trauma	p-value^*
CRT change (μ m)	66 ± 16	74 ± 108	94 ± 101	70 ± 61	39 ± 88	56 ± 91	0.958

Values are presented as mean ± SD unless otherwise indicated. ERMP = epiretinal membrane peeling; CRT = central macular thickness; DR = diabetic retinopathy; RVO = retinal vein occlusion; RRD = rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.

^* Analyzed by ANCOVA.

TOOLS

Similar articles