Purpose To investigate the clinical characteristics, internal correlations and risk factors for different locations of retinoschisis (RS) in an elderly high myopia (HM) population. Methods A total of 448 eyes (304 participants) were analysed and classified into no retinoschisis (no‐RS), paravascular retinoschisis (PVRS), peripapillary retinoschisis (PPRS) and macular retinoschisis (MRS) groups. Each participant underwent comprehensive ophthalmic examinations, and posterior scleral height (PSH) was measured in swept‐source optical coherence tomography images. PSH, vitreoretinal interface abnormities and myopic atrophy maculopathy (MAM) were compared among groups. Results Retinoschisis was found in 195 (43.5%) eyes, among which 170 (37.9%) had PVRS, 123 (27.5%) had PPRS, and 103 (23.0%) had MRS. MRS was found to be combined with PVRS in 96 of 103 (93.2%) eyes. MAM was one of the risk factors for RS (odds ratio [OR], 2.459; p = 0.005). Higher nasal PSH was the only risk factor for PVRS (OR, 9.103; p = 0.008 per 1‐mm increase). Elongation of axial length (AL) (OR, 1.891; p < 0.001 per 1‐mm increase), higher PSH in nasal (OR, 5.059; p = 0.009 per 1‐mm increase) and temporal (OR, 13.021; p = 0.012 per 1‐mm increase), epiretinal membrane (ERM; OR, 2.841; p = 0.008) and vitreomacular traction (VMT; OR, 7.335; p = 0.002) were risk factors for MRS. Conclusions Paravascular retinoschisis is the most common type of RS in HM and MRS is mostly combined with PVRS. MAM is one of the risk factors for RS. In addition to longer AL and higher PSH, the presence of VMT and ERM also play an important role in the formation of MRS.

Purpose: To compare three different internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling techniques, including standard ILM peeling, fovea-sparing ILM peeling, and inverted ILM flap (ILMF), in the treatment of myopic traction maculopathy with high risk of postoperative macular hole development. Method: This retrospective cohort study enrolled 101 eyes suffering from lamellar macular hole combined with myopic traction maculopathy in 98 consecutive patients who underwent vitrectomy with either standard ILM peeling, fovea-sparing ILM peeling, or ILMF from July 2017 to August 2020. All patients were followed up for at least 12 months after surgery. Best-corrected visual acuity, macular anatomical outcomes, and postoperative full-thickness macular hole (FTMH) formation were evaluated. Results: No significant differences were found among the three surgical groups in baseline characteristics. 12 months after surgery, the mean best-corrected visual acuity was significantly improved (P < 0.001) and showed no significant differences among groups (P = 0.452). None of the eyes in the ILMF group, five eyes (15.6%) in the standard ILM peeling group, and six eyes (17.1%) in the fovea-sparing ILM peeling group developed a postoperative FTMH (P = 0.026). Logistic regression showed that the ILM peeling technique was an independent influencing factor for FTMH formation (OR = 0.209, P = 0.014). Conclusion: Compared with the standard ILM peeling or fovea-sparing ILM peeling technique, the ILMF technique resulted in similar visual outcomes but a relatively low incidence of postoperative FTMH in the treatment of lamellar macular hole combined with myopic traction maculopathy. Inverted ILM flap is an effective technique for treating myopic traction maculopathy with high risk of postoperative FTMH development.