Table 1.

Large Macular Holes: Surgical Techniques with Various ILM Approaches and Outcomes Among Different Studies

Study (Year)	Surgical Technique	Eyes (Number)	MH Size (μm)	Pre-Operative VA (LogMAR)	Post-Operative VA (LogMAR)	Closure Rate	Mean f-up (Months)
Michalewska et al (2010)98	Inverted ILM flap	50	Range 415–1618	1.11	0.55	98%	12
Michalewska et al (2015)117	Inverted ILM flap	43	Range 400–841	1.01	0.40	93%	12
	Temporal inverted ILM flap	44		1.03	0.45	93%
Andrew et al (2016)121	Folded inverted ILM flap	24	Mean 528	0.90	0.48	100	12
Mete et al (2017)111	ILM peeling	36	Myopic MHs ≥ 400	0.60	0.58	61%	6
	Inverted ILM flap	34		0.70	0.39	94%
Ota et al (2018)113	ILM peeling	44	Mean 465.9–491.5	0.70	0.30	93%	6
	Inverted ILM flap	46		0.80	0.40	100%
Ch’ng et al (2018)97	ILM peel with gas tamponade	258	Range: 400–1416	0.95	0.62	90%	3
Rizzo et al (2018)109	ILM peeling	300	MH ≥ 400	0.79	0.56	79%	9
	Inverted ILM flap	320		0.81	0.49	96%
Ghassemi et al (2019)122	Hemicircular ILM peel with temporally hinged inverted flap	24	Mean 553–548	0.91	0.52	87%	6
	Circular ILM peel with temporally hinged inverted flap	23		0.90	0.53	91%
	Circular ILM peel with superior inverted flap	25		0.91	0.55	100%
Ramtohul et al (2020)110	ILM peeling	23	Range 400–1159	1.04	0.70	70%	6
	Inverted ILM flap	23		0.92	0.45	96%
Peng et al (2020)123	ILM dragging and peeling	26	Mean 524	1.20	0.70	96%	21

Abbreviations: MH, idiopathic full-thickness macular hole; ILM, internal limiting membrane; VA, visual acuity.