Epiretinal membrane surgery is widely regarded as one of the most frequently conducted procedures by retinal surgeons; however, a prevailing challenge for surgeons is identifying the right time for surgical intervention. Even with successful ERM removal, the visual outcome is not always satisfactory. Currently, SD-OCT is the gold standard for evaluating macular pathology and considerable research has been dedicated to the prediction of surgical and anatomical outcomes following ERM surgery based on SD-OCT findings.
Attention was initially focused on outer retinal findings in ERM due to deterioration of the outer retinal layers, and it was suggested that persistent impairment of photoreceptors thereby was correlated with an unfavorable visual prognosis10. However, since traction on the inner retinal layer has been shown to be associated with electrophysiological dysfunction and structural changes in patients with ERM, more attention has been given to inner retinal findings11. Due to a lack of consensus, outer and inner retina layer SD-OCT findings are currently used for evaluation before ERM surgery and to predict outcomes12.
Our findings showed a significant improvement in CFT and BCVA following ERM removal. The result is likely because early membrane removal prevents further progression of photoreceptor damage in patients with ERM13. Other studies have examined the relation between the CFT and visual outcomes in patients with ERM; however, results are inconsistent. Some studies have shown a correlation between a postoperative decrease in CFT and an increase in BCVA 13,14. On the other hand, 2 multivariate analyses conducted by Hosoda et al.15 and Kim et al.16 found that CFT was not a reliable predictor for visual outcome after ERM surgery. In our multivariate linear regression model, no significant association between the degree of BCVA improvement and the degree of CFT resolution was found. The varying results may indicate that CFT is just one of several variables affecting visual acuity, and the relations are not fully understood15.
Our results showed that DRIL was significantly reduced after surgery, and similar results were reported in prior studies17,18. Prior research has indicated that severe DRIL at baseline, defined as GCIPL, INL, and OPL all being indistinguishable, is correlated with limited improvement in visual acuity after surgery12,18. Though some study has shown that severe DRIL is related to poor visual outcomes after surgery19, the study by Karasavvidou et al.12 in which a linear regression model was developed did not find a correlation between mild DRIL and BCVA outcome after surgery; a finding that is consistent with our results. The reason may be that our patients had a lower baseline severity of DRIL.
Our results showed a significant decrease in the cotton ball sign after ERM removal. The cotton-ball sign is a round or diffuse highly reflective region at the center of the fovea caused by continuous inward traction from the ERM20. Our findings are consistent with those of Tsunoda et al.20, which showed the release of inward traction on the retinal layer after ERM removal. González-Saldivar et al.4 considered the cotton ball sign to be a prognostic factor of poor visual acuity after ERM surgery; however, their analysis did not a statistically significant association between the cotton ball sign and postoperative visual acuity. Our multivariable analysis did not find a significant relation between the cotton ball sign and an improvement in BCVA after ERM surgery. These results suggest that the disappearance of the cotton ball sign does not correlate with an improvement in BCVA after ERM surgery. Notably, a retrospective study showed that the cotton ball sign can be observed in patients with good vision20. A possible speculation is that traction forces from the ERM to the outer retinal layers are present in the early stages of ERM development; however, these changes are transient and are reversible after ERM removal. Tsunoda et al. 20 pointed out that the disappearance of the cotton ball sign after ERM surgery does not necessarily indicate an increase or decrease in visual acuity after surgery. The authors concluded that the cotton ball sign may only be used as a predictor of visual impairment if there is longstanding inward traction at the fovea causing irreversible retinal damage 20. Notably, our results showed that ERM foveoschisis and MME identified on OCT preoperatively were significantly associated with postoperative visual improvement.
As reported in prior publications, our results showed that better baseline visual acuity was predictive of a better improvement in postoperative BCVA11,21. The possible reason is that most of our patients ERM was present for a relatively short period of time, causing less functional disturbance.
Recently, a new OCT-based definition of idiopathic epiretinal membrane foveoschisis (ERM-foveoschisis) was proposed by an international panel of vitreoretinal experts8. In our study, although not statistically significant, ERM-foveoschisis was shown to be resolved postoperatively (P = 0.063) (Supplementary Fig. 2), which is consistent with the results of previous studies22,23. In addition, our results were similar to those of other studies in those patients with ERM-foveoschisis had had an improvement in vision after surgery22,23. A possible reason is that the release of traction allows the axons of Müller cells to return to their original morphology24, which restores their function in the visual transmission pathway. However, a persistence of intraretinal hyporeflective spaces in the foveal region was noted by Figueroa et al.24 in the early postoperative period, although they gradually subsided during follow-up period. The delayed healing progress observed in patients with ERM-foveoschisis might indicate chronic inflammation and damage. This could explain our findings, which revealed that patients with preoperative ERM-foveoschisis showed comparatively less visual improvement after surgery than those without it.
Another OCT finding, MME which was first described in multiple sclerosis and neuromyelitis optica, has recently been studied as a predictor of postoperative visual acuity after ERM surgery25,26. Lee et al.25noted less improvement in BCVA after ERM surgery in patients with preoperative MME during a follow-up of 3 months25. Yang et al.26 observed similar results in a study with a follow-up period of 24 months. Our results showed that the postoperative improvement of BCVA was less in patients with preoperative MME than in those without it. Müller cell damage and retrograde trans-synaptic degeneration to bipolar cells are the two most prevalent hypotheses for this finding, and it is speculated that breakdown of the integrity of the blood–retinal barrier and dysfunction of bipolar cells affect intraretinal fluid hemostasis and visual pathway transmission25,26,27. These findings suggest that MME might be associated with chronic inflammation, leading to challenges in achieving greater visual improvement after surgery.
The limitations of our study include its retrospective nature, the relatively small sample size, and the relatively short follow-up period. In addition, we did not account for the severity of DRIL and EIFL because there is a lack of qualitative grading of these parameters. However, there are a number of strengths of our study. First, eyes included in the study were pseudophakia, which eliminated interference of the functional assessment due to postoperative lenticular changes. Additionally, ERM-foveoschisis and MME are relatively newly defined OCT parameters. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first multivariable analysis that suggests these two parameters are indicators of limited visual outcomes in patients with ERM and pseudophakia.
In conclusions, in this study we determined prognostic factors for visual outcomes of ERM surgery by eliminating confounding factors such as BCVA improvement following combined cataract surgery or BCVA deterioration due to cataract progression. ERM- foveoschisis and MME identified preoperatively are correlated with visual improvement after surgery, but the degree of improvement is less compared to patients without these conditions. Better baseline visual acuity is correlated with better visual improvement after surgery. The precise nature of how ERM-foveoschisis and MME result in less improvement of BCVA improvement remains to be determined.