Macular hole Delphi consensus statement (MHOST)

Purpose To derive a Delphi method-based consensus for the surgical management of Full Thickness Macular Hole (FTMH) and Lamellar Macular Hole (LMH). Methods 37 expert VR surgeons from 21 mainly European countries participated in Delphi method-based questionnaire for diagnosis and treatment of FTMHs...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Confalonieri, Filippo, Haave, Hanna, Binder, Susanne, Bober, Agnieszka Monika, Bragadottir, Ragnheidur, Faber, Rowan Thomas, Bærland, Thomas Pedersen, Forsaa, Vegard Asgeir, Gonzalez-Lopez, Julio J, Govetto, Andrea, Haugstad, Marta, Ivastinovic, Domagoj, Jenko, Neža Čokl, Nicoară, Simona Delia, Kaljurand, Kuldar, Kozak, Igor, Kvanta, Anders, Lytvynchuk, Lyubomyr, Nawrocka, Zofia Anna, Pajic, Sanja Petrovic, Petrovič, Mojca Globočnik, Radecka, Liga, Rehak, Matus, Romano, Mario R, Ruban, Andrii, Speckauskas, Martynas, Stene-Johansen, Ingar, Stranak, Zbynek, Thaler, Angela, Thein, Anna Sophie Aagaard, Theocharis, Ioannis, Tomic, Zoran, Yan, Xiaohe, Zekolli, Muhamet, Zhuri, Burim, Znaor, Ljubo, Petrovski, Beata Eva, Kolko, Miriam, Lumi, Xhevat, Petrovski, Goran
Format: Article
Language:English
Online Access:Request full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose To derive a Delphi method-based consensus for the surgical management of Full Thickness Macular Hole (FTMH) and Lamellar Macular Hole (LMH). Methods 37 expert VR surgeons from 21 mainly European countries participated in Delphi method-based questionnaire for diagnosis and treatment of FTMHs and LMHs. Results A total of 36 items were rated in round 1 by 37 participants, of which 10 items achieved consensus: intraoperative verification of PVD; clinical superiority of OCT-based FTMH classification; practical ineffectiveness of ocriplasmin; circular 360° ILM peeling for small macular holes; use of regular surgical technique for the size of the hole in concomitant retinal detachment; performing complete vitrectomy; SF6 gas as preferred tamponade; cataract surgery if crystalline lens is mildly/moderately opaque; removal of both ILM and LHEP in LMH surgery. In round 2, 18 items with moderate consensus (45-70% agreement) in round 1 were rated by 35 participants. Final consensus was reached in 35% of questions related to both diagnosis and surgical procedures. Conclusions This Delphi study provides valuable information about the consensus/disagreement on different scenarios encountered during FTMH and LMH management as a guide tosurgical decision-making. High rate of disagreement and/or variable approaches still exist for treating such relatively common conditions.