Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 5, 2026
In vivo Structural Assessments of Ocular Disease in Rodent Models using Optical Coherence Tomography
Published on: July 24, 2020
Pediatric and Adolescent Traumatic Macular Hole: A Systematic Review
Youssef A H Helmy1, Ayman G ElNahry2, Ola El Zein3
1From the Department of Ophthalmology, Stoke Mandeville Hospital, Buckinghamshire NHS Healthcare Trust (Y.A.H.L.), Aylesbury, UK; Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University (Y.A.H.L., A.G.E.), Cairo, Egypt.
Purpose:
The optimal management of pediatric traumatic macular holes (TMH) is unclear from lack of prospective randomized trials. The literature is divided into early (≤1month post-trauma), delayed (>1 month) pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), and observation. Our aim is to find which group can achieve best-superior spectacle corrected visual acuity (VA), visual gain, and time for hole closure.
Design:
Systematic review.
Methods:
This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (ID:CRD42022383134). The databases searched from inception until July 31, 2023, were MEDLINE OVID, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar. The articles were screened for title and abstract then for full text. Risk of bias was also assessed. Three outcome measures were analyzed: final VA, visual gain, and time to closure of macular hole (MH). MH size was divided into small (≤250 µm), medium (>250-500 µm), and large (>500 µm).
Results:
Ninety eight (98) studies with 234 patients in the PPV group and 87 patients in the observation group were included in the review. Final VA (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) and visual gain were respectively in PPV vs observation groups: (1) small MH 0.37 ± 0.52 vs 0.42 ± 0.56 (P = .484) and -0.96 ± 0.83 vs -0.49 ± 0.40 (P = .005); (2) medium MH 0.58 ± 0.39 vs 0.34 ± 0.34 (P = .06) and -0.36 ± 0.42 vs -0.74 ± 0.44 (P < .001); (3) large MH 0.62 ± 0.42 vs 0.59 ± 0.35 (P = .337) and -0.31 ± 0.48 vs -0.62 ± 0.37 (P = .11). Small TMH had comparable closure time: 3.21 ± 2.52 months vs 3.49 ± 4.43 (P = .954) in the PPV and observation groups. Early and late PPV yielded comparable final VA 0.67 ± 0.66 vs 0.54 ± 0.35 (P = .576) and visual gain -0.58 ± 0.69 vs -0.49 ± 0.48 (P = .242) in the PPV and observation groups.
Conclusions:
PPV was very effective in closing TMH and VA gain in children throughout a wide range of hole size. Early and delayed PPV yielded similar anatomic and visual results. Observation and PPV yielded comparable final VA and closure time. Clinicians can choose either early PPV or delayed PPV when healing biomarkers are absent on periodic optical coherence tomography.
