Skip to main content
. 2019 Dec;7(23):726. doi: 10.21037/atm.2019.12.20

Table 2. Comparison of baseline characteristics in the observational group between patients whose TMH closed and patients whose TMH did not close.

Subgroups Closed (n=10) Non-closed (n=5) P value
Age (in years), mean ± SD 35.6±12.4 26.3±5.3 0.06
Gender, n (%)
   Male 10 (100.0) 4 (80.0) 0.09
   Female 0 (0.0) 1 (20.0) 0.09
Duration between injury and vision decrease (in days), mean ± SD 0.00±0.00 3.25±5.85 0.35
Duration between injury and confirmed diagnosis of TMH (in days), mean ± SD 9.45±10.45 10.75±4.92 0.82
Posttraumatic BCVA (logMAR) 1.75±1.09 1.53±1.16 0.74
Mean diameter of the hole, mean ± SD
   Minimal diameter 404.9±277.1 473.5±122.1 0.65
   Basal diameter 1,927.3±903.6 1,311.8±783.4 0.25
Weiss ring, n (%) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
Perifoveal PVD, n (%) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
Cystic edema of the hole edge, n (%) 1 (10.0) 3 (60.0) 0.03
Presence of Berlin edema, n (%) 5 (50.0) 1 (20.0) 0.31
Presence of extrafoveal hemorrhage or choroidal rupture, n (%) 3 (30.0) 1 (20.0) 0.68
Shape of the TMH, n (%)
   Round 5 (50.0) 3 (60.0)
   Elliptic 5 (50.0) 2 (40.0) 0.71

TMH, traumatic macular hole; SD, standard deviation; BCVA, best corrected visual acuity; logMAR, logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution; PVD, posterior vitreous detachment.