Macular Hole Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial Using Autologous Serum Adjuvant

Lauritzen, Derek B.; Hampton, G. Robert; Torrisi, Paul F.; Rutledge, Bryan K.; Delaney, William V.; Spalding, Samuel C.

doi:10.1385/ao:35:2:123

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We identified 20 eligible RCTs 15,25,[34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33] . We attempted to contact all corresponding authors via email and requires individual participant data (IPD) from their study participants.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Macular Hole Duration on Surgical Outcomes

Murphy

Al-Zubaidy²,

Lois³

et al. 2023

Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Macular Hole Duration on Surgical Outcomes

Murphy

Al-Zubaidy²,

Lois³

et al. 2023

Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Autologous Serum for the Treatment of Macular Holes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Amaral,

Rassi,

Jacometti

et al. 2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of autologous human serum as an adjuvant agent in pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for macular holes (MH). Thus, a comprehensive search was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases up to August 20th, 2023. The inclusion criteria targeted randomized clinical trials (RCTs) or non-RCTs that compared the use of autologous serum in vitrectomy for MH with the same procedure without the serum. The outcomes were MH closure rates and postoperative complications such as retinal detachment and cataracts. Odds ratios (OR) and mean differences (MDs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Review Manager 5.3 (The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK) was used for statistical analysis. Four studies, comprising two RCTs and two non-randomized cohort studies with 373 eyes of 372 patients, were included. The pooled analysis showed no significant difference in MH closure rates (OR 1.28; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.48 to 3.43; P=0.62) and no difference concerning the incidence of adverse events (OR 0.97; 95% CI: 0.30-3.09; P=0.96). Leave-one-out sensitivity analysis excluding the study by Lauritzen et al. revealed a significant difference in anatomical closure, favoring the serum arm, and demonstrated a reduction in the level of heterogeneity. Our meta-analysis demonstrated no difference between groups in the pooled analysis of all studies. However, considering the quality assessment of one of the included studies, and observing the divergent result in sensitivity analysis following its exclusion, there are indications that might suggest the superiority of the serum in terms of the analyzed endpoints. This finding highlights the existing research gaps and the imperative need for additional high-quality randomized trials to further investigate this treatment.

show abstract

Macular Hole Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial Using Autologous Serum Adjuvant

Cited by 2 publications

References 25 publications

The Effect of Macular Hole Duration on Surgical Outcomes

The Effect of Macular Hole Duration on Surgical Outcomes

Autologous Serum for the Treatment of Macular Holes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About