Table 3.
Characteristics of eyes developing ERM after peripheral laser photocoagulation.
| Characteristics | Number (%) |
|---|---|
| Duration from laser to ERM development (months)a | 19.1 ± 17.2 |
| Findings at first presentationERM gradingb | |
| Stage 1 | 13 (43.8%) |
| Stage 2 | 8 (25.0%) |
| Stage 3 | 5 (15.6%) |
| Stage 4 | 5 (15.6%) |
| CMT (μm)a | 232.1 ± 131.8 |
| CMO | 10 (31.3%) |
| Follow-ups | |
| Follow-up duration (months) | 15.3 ± 10.4 |
| Changes over the period | |
| Stable | 15 (46.9%) |
| Progressedc | 17 (53.1%) |
| Regressedc | 0 (0%) |
| Requirement of surgical intervention | 10 (31.3%) |
ERM epiretinal membrane, CMT central macular thickness, CMO central macular oedema, defined as a CMT greater than 250 μm.
aData were presented as mean ± standard deviation.
bERM was classified into four ERM stages according to the Govetto grading system. Stage 1 – presence of a foveal pit with well-conserved retinal layers; Stage 2 – absence of the foveal pit; Stage 3 – presence of ectopic inner foveal layers; Stage 4 – retinal layers disruption.
cProgression or regression is defined as staging advancement or regression based on the Govetto grading system, with or without a change in central macular thickness (CMT) exceeding 250 μm.