Background characteristics
Patient background characteristics are presented in Table 1. There were no significant differences in sex, age, or percentage of pseudo-macular holes between the two groups. In the Good and Moderate groups, two and one eye, respectively, had already undergone IOL implantation. In the Good group, one eye had been treated with lens sparing vitrectomy.
No postoperative complications such as vitreous hemorrhage, retinal detachment, endophthalmitis, visual field loss, cystoid macular edema, and cataract progression were reported.
BCVA (Table 2 and Fig. 1)
Significant improvements in BCVA at each time point were noted in both the Good and the Moderate group. The Good group, however, showed significantly better BCVA preoperatively, as well as at post-3 M and post-6 M (P < 0.0001, P < 0.0001, and P = 0.003, respectively).
Horizontal metamorphopsia scores (Table 2, Fig. 2)
The scores at post-1 M, post-3 M, post-6 M, and post-12 M in the Good group indicated significant improvement of MH at each time point (P = 0.0003, P < 0.0001, P < 0.0001, and P < 0.0001, respectively). In the Moderate group, the scores at post-3 M and post-6 M showed significant improvement (P = 0.015 and P < 0.0001, respectively). However, there were no significant differences between two groups at post-3 M and post-6 M.
Vertical metamorphopsia scores (Table 2, Fig. 3)
The scores at post-1 M, post-3 M and post-6 M in the Good group all showed significant improvement in MV (P = 0.0006, P = 0.048, and P = 0.018, respectively). In the Moderate group, only the score at post-3M showed significant improvement. However, there were no significant improvements at the final observation in either group (P = 0.38 at post-12 M in the Good group and P = 0.06 at post-6 M in the Moderate group). There were no significant differences between the two groups preoperatively or at post-3 M or post-6 M (P = 0.62, P = 0.22, and P = 0.85, respectively).
Horizontal aniseikonia scores (Table 2, Fig. 4)
The Good group showed no changes in AH as compared with the preoperative rate at any of the observation points. In the Moderate group, significant worsening of macropsia was seen at post-3 M and post-6 M (P = 0.013 and P = 0.009, respectively). Though there were no significant differences between the groups at the preoperative time point (P = 0.51), in the Good group, significant reductions in macropsia were observed at post-3 M and post-6 M (P = 0.005 and P = 0.007, respectively).
Vertical aniseikonia scores (Table 2, Fig. 5)
The Good group showed neither significant improvement nor worsening of AV as compared with the preoperative value at any observation point. In the Moderate group, there was significant worsening of macropsia at post-6 M (P = 0.011). Though the two groups did not differ significantly at the preoperative time point (P = 0.15), in the Good group, macropsia was significantly reduced at post-3 M and post-6 M (P = 0.004 and P = 0.004, respectively).
Binocular vision (Table 2, Fig. 6)
The Good group showed no change in binocular vision as compared with the preoperative value. In the Moderate group, the post-6 M values showed significant improvement (P = 0.014). Although intergroup comparison revealed stereopsis to be significantly better in the Good group preoperatively (P = 0.02), no significant intergroup differences were found at either post-3 M or post-6 M (P = 0.18 and P = 0.63, respectively).
CFT measurements (Table 2, Fig. 7)
In the Good group, the CFT measurements at post-1 M, post-3 M, post-6 M, and post-12 M indicated significant thinning (P = 0.001, P < 0.0001, and P < 0.0001). In the Moderate group, the postoperative values at post-3 M and post-6 M showed significant thinning. (P < 0.0001 and P < 0.0001). Intergroup comparisons indicated that at the preoperative and post-3 M time points, CFT was significantly thinner in the Good group than in the Moderate group (P < 0.0001 and 0.02), whereas there was no significant difference at the post-6 M time point (P = 0.065).
Factors affecting changes in horizontal metamorphopsia score (multivariate analysis) (Table 3)
Factors affecting changes in postoperative MH, including age, preoperative BCVA, preoperative MH, preoperative MV, preoperative AH, preoperative AV, and preoperative CFT, were investigated. Multivariate analysis identified only preoperative MH as a factor that affected changes in postoperative MH. (P < 0.0001).
Horizontal metamorphopsia score variation (Fig. 8)
The estimated MH values obtained by applying the category model (Table 4) are presented in Figure 8. The post-6 M score was predicted to be 0.4997° based on the preoperative MH of 0.9°.
NEI VFQ-25 (Good group only), (Table 5)
The VFQ-25 questionnaire results of the Good group, pre- versus post-operative, are summarized in Table 5.
General health and Near activities showed significant improvement at post-12 M (P = 0.004, P < 0.0001). General vision, Ocular pain and Mental health were significantly improved at both post-6 M and post-12 M (P = 0.005, P = 0.0005: P = 0.002, P = 0.014: P = 0.047 and P = 0.002, respectively). The postoperative composite score showed significant improvement at post-12 M (P = 0.002).