À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦¼ú ÈÄ ¹ß»ýÇÑ È²¹Ý¿ø°ø: ¿¹¹æÀÌ °¡´ÉÇÑ°¡?
Macular Hole Formation after Vitrectomy: Preventable?
´ëÇѾȰúÇÐȸÁö 2014³â 55±Ç 2È£ p.230 ~ p.236
±è¸®ºê°¡(Kim Re-Be-Cca) - °è¸í´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ¾È°úÇб³½Ç
±èÀ¯Ã¶(Kim Yu-Cheol) - °è¸í´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ¾È°úÇб³½Ç
±è±¤¼ö(Kim Kwang-Soo) - °è¸í´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ¾È°úÇб³½Ç
Abstract
¸ñÀû: À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦¼ú ÈÄ ¹ß»ýÇÑ È²¹Ý¿ø°øÀÇ ÀÓ»óºÐ¼®À» ÅëÇØ ¹ß»ý ¿øÀÎÀ» ÃßÁ¤ÇÏ°í, ¿ø°ø¹ß»ýÀÇ ¿¹¹æÀÌ °¡´ÉÇÑÁö ¾Ë¾Æº¸¾Ò´Ù.
´ë»ó°ú ¹æ¹ý: À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦¼ú ÈÄ È²¹Ý¿ø°øÀÌ ¹ß»ýÇÑ È¯ÀÚ 27¸íÀÇ 28¾ÈÀ» ´ë»óÀ¸·Î ³ªÀÌ, ¼ºº°, ¼ö¼ú Àü ÈÄ ÃÖ´ë±³Á¤½Ã·Â, ÀÏÂ÷ À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦ ¼úÀÇ ½ÃÇà ¿øÀÎ ¹× ½Ã¼úÁßÀÇ ¹®Á¦Á¡, ¼ú ÈÄ È²¹Ý¿ø°ø ¹ß»ý±îÁöÀÇ ±â°£, ¾ÈÀú°Ë»ç ¹× ºû°£¼·´ÜÃþÃÔ¿µÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÑ ¿ø°øÇü¼º ÀüÈÄÀÇ È²¹Ý¼Ò °ßÀ» Á¶»çÇÏ°í, ¿ø°ø Çü¼º Àü°ú ¿ø°ø¼ö¼ú ÈÄÀÇ ½Ã·Â°á°ú¸¦ ºñ±³ÇÏ¿´´Ù.
°á°ú: À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦¼úÀ» ½ÃÇàÇÑ ÃÑ 2,945¾È Áß 28¾È(0.96%)¿¡¼ Ȳ¹Ý¿ø°øÀÌ ¹ß»ýÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÀÌÁß ÀÏÂ÷ À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦¼ú ½ÃÇà¿øÀÎÀº ´ç´¢¸Á¸·º´ Áõ(12¾È), ¸Á¸·¹Ú¸®(6¾È), ºÐÁö¸Á¸·Á¤¸ÆÆó¼â(2¾È), Ȳ¹Ýº¯¼º(3¾È), ¿Ü»ó ¹× ±âŸ(3¾È)¿´°í, ÀÏÂ÷ À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦¼ú ÀÌÈÄ È²¹Ý¿ø°ø ¹ß»ý±îÁöÀÇ ±â°£Àº Æò±Õ 20.4°³¿ù(4ÀÏ-115°³¿ù)À̾ú´Ù. Ȳ¹Ý¿ø°øÀÇ ÃßÁ¤µÈ ¿øÀÎÀ¸·Î ³¶Æ÷Ȳ¹ÝºÎÁ¾ 12¾È, ³»°æ°è¸·/¸Á¸·Àü¸·ÀÌ µÎ²¨¿öÁö°Å³ª ¸Á¸· Àü¸·ÀÇ Àç¹ß 7¾È, ¾ãÀº Ȳ¹Ý 6¾È, À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦¼ú Áß È²¹Ý¼Õ»ó 2¾ÈÀ̾ú°í 1¾È¿¡¼´Â Ȳ¹ÝÇÏÃâÇ÷ÀÌ °ü·ÃÀÖ¾ú´Ù. Ȳ¹Ý¿ø°ø¼ö¼ú ÈÄ ÃÖÁ¾½Ã ·ÂÀº ¿ø°øÇü¼º Àü°ú ºñ±³ÇÏ¿© 7¾È(25%)¿¡¼¸¸ À¯ÁöµÇ°í ´ëºÎºÐ °¨ÅðÇÏ¿´°í ³¶Æ÷Ȳ¹ÝºÎÁ¾°ú °ü·ÃµÈ Ȳ¹Ý¿ø°øÀÇ ½Ã·Â¿¹ÈÄ°¡ °¡Àå ºÒ·® ÇÏ¿´´Ù.
°á·Ð: À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦¼ú ÈÄ¿¡ ¹ß»ýÇÑ È²¹Ý¿ø°øÀº Ä¡·á ÈÄ¿¡µµ ½Ã·Â¿¹ÈÄ°¡ ÁÁÁö ¾ÊÀ¸¹Ç·Î °æ°ú Áß ¿ø°ø¹ß»ý°ú ¿¬°ü¼ºÀÌ ³ôÀº ¼Ò°ßÀÌ °üÂûµÇ ´Â °æ¿ì ÀÌ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÀûÀýÇÑ Ã³Ä¡°¡ ÇÊ¿äÇÏ°í, ¾Æ¿ï·¯ ÀÏÂ÷¼ö¼ú Áß È²¹Ý¿¡ °úµµÇÑ °ßÀÎÀ¸·Î ÀÎÇÑ ÀÇÀμº ¼Õ»óÀ» ÁÙÀ̸é ÀÌÂ÷ÀûÀΠȲ¹Ý¿ø °øÀÇ ¹ß»ýÀ» »ó´çºÎºÐ ÁÙÀÏ ¼ö ÀÖÀ» °ÍÀ¸·Î »ý°¢ÇÑ´Ù.
Purpose: To evaluate the causes of secondary macular hole after vitrectomy and the possibility of their prevention.
Methods: 27 patients (28 eyes) who experienced macular hole formation after vitrectomy were reviewed retrospectively. Age, sex, operation methods, duration between the vitrectomy and the secondary macular hole surgery and causes of the primary vitrectomy were recorded. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) before and after primary vitrectomy; preoperative and postoperative macular findings with optical coherence tomography and fundus examination; and BCVA before and after macular hole surgery were analyzed.
Results: Of the 2945 eyes that had undergone vitrectomy, 28 eyes (0.96%) experienced macular hole formation. As causes of primary vitrectomy, 12 eyes had proliferative diabetic retinopathy, 6 eyes had rhegmatogenous retinal detachment, 2 eyes had branch retinal vein occlusion, 3 eyes had age-related macular degeneration and 5 eyes had trauma such as eyeball rupture or intraocular foreign body. The mean duration between primary vitrectomy and macular hole formation was 20.4 months (4 days-115 months). The estimated causes of macular hole formation included cystoid macular edema (CME) (n = 13), thinning of the macula (n = 6), thickening of internal limiting membrane or recurrence of preretinal membrane (PRM) (n = 7), recurrence of subretinal hemorrhage (n = 1) and macular damage during vitrectomy (n = 2). Final BCVA after macular hole surgery decreased in most cases compared to BCVA before macular hole formation except in 7 eyes (25%).
Conclusions: Close observation of the macula after primary vitrectomy especially in eyes with continuous CME, and recurrent PRM and proper management on them including timely removal of the tangential traction force are necessary for preventing macular hole formation. In addition, surgeons should make efforts not to exert excessive tractional force on the macula to avoid iatrogenic damage during removal of the preretinal membrane.
Å°¿öµå
Cystoid macular edema, Macular hole, Preretinal membrane, Vitrectomy
KMID :
0360220140550020230
¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸
µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸
À¯È¿¼º°á°ú(Recomendation)