A Comparison of Face-Down Positioning and Adjustable Positioning After Pars Plana Vitrectomy for Macular Hole Retinal Detachment in High Myopia

PurposeTo compare the anatomical and functional outcomes of macular hole retinal detachment (MHRD) in high myopia after pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with face-down positioning and adjustable positioning. MethodsFifty-three eyes from 53 patients with MHRD were analyzed in this study. All patients received PPV with silicon oil for tamponade and then subdivided into 2 groups: 28 were included in a face-down positioning group and 25 were included in the adjustable positioning group. Patients were followed up for at least 6 months. The main outcome was the rate of anatomical macular hole (MH) closure and retinal reattachment. Secondary outcome measures were the best-corrected visual acuity and postoperative complications. ResultsThere was no significant difference in the rate of MH closure (53.6 vs. 72.0%, p = 0.167) and retinal reattachment (100 vs. 96%, p = 0.472) between the face-down group and adjustable group. Compared with the mean preoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), the mean postoperative BCVA at the 6-month follow-up improved significantly in both groups (p = 0, both). But there was no significant difference in the mean postoperative BCVA (p = 0.102) and mean BCVA improvement (p = 0.554) at 6 months after surgery between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the high intraocular pressure (IOP) after surgery between the two groups (53.6 vs. 44%, p = 0.487). There were no other complications that occurred during the follow-up. ConclusionAdjustable positioning after PPV with silicon oil tamponade for MHRD repair is effective and safe. Face-down positioning does not seem to be necessary for all patients with MHRD.