English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Purpose   To report the results of the epiretinal membrane (ERM) management guidelines followed in our center.Methods   Patients with ERM seen between 2014 and 2015, with ≥2 years follow-up or who had undergone ERM surgery, were included. Corrected visual acuity (VA), lens status, and ERM configuration were recorded at each visit. Our guidelines for ERM are if VA is ≥20/30, observation is recommended unless there is moderate/intense metamorphopsia. Vitrectomy is recommended during follow-up if there is a drop >one line in VA with changes in ERM configuration. If VA at diagnosis is <20/30, vitrectomy is recommended. If visual loss is thought to be due to cataract, phacoemulsification is performed first and visual status reevaluated.Results   Ninety-nine eyes of 94 patients were included; 52 eyes underwent vitrectomy, and 47 eyes were monitored. From eyes with VA at diagnosis <20/30 (41 eyes), 8 eyes underwent isolated phacoemulsification: VA improved to ≥20/30. Vitrectomy was recommended but refused by 4 patients. The other 29 eyes underwent vitrectomy. Of the 58 eyes with VA at diagnosis ≥20/30, 5 underwent surgery due to metamorphopsia. Eighteen eyes underwent vitrectomy during follow-up. VA improved a mean of 0.13 logMAR (SD 0.30) after vitrectomy. There were no differences in mean VA improvement between eyes that underwent vitrectomy within six months of diagnosis (0.24, SD 0.32) and those that underwent surgery more than six months after diagnosis (mean 0.17, SD 0.17),  p =0.106. Three eyes developed postsurgical complications with visual loss: persistent macular edema in one eye, two consecutive retinal detachments in one eye, and a central visual defect in another eye. At the end of follow-up, VA was similar in the observation group (0.14, SD 0.14) and in the vitrectomy group (0.16, SD 0.28),  p =0.528.Conclusions   Our proposed guidelines lead to visual preservation in most patients while limiting surgery and its possible complications.

Epiretinal Membrane Surgery in Daily Clinical Practice: Results of a Proposed Management Scheme