The outcomes of epiretinal membrane peeling in patients with foveal herniation

Table 1 General characteristics of the whole group

Patient no.	Age	Gender	Follow-op, months	Lens status	Cataract surgery	Preop BCVA, LogMAR	Month 12 BCVA, LogMAR	Preop CRT, µ	Month 12 CRT, µ	Peeled membrane	Tamponade	Postop foveal contour	Complication
1	64	Female	18	Phakic	–	1.00	0.52	540	324	ERM + ILM	SIVI	Incomplete	Cataract
2	68	Male	14	Phakic	+	0.52	0.70	381	388	ERM + ILM	HAVA	Absent	–
3	61	Female	13	Phakic	+	0.52	0.15	421	336	ERM	SIVI	Incomplete	–
4	61	Female	14	Phakic	–	0.70	0.52	556	350	ERM	SIVI	Incomplete	Cataract
5	61	Female	12	Phakic	–	0.70	0.70	268	264	ERM + ILM	SIVI	Complete	–
6	65	Female	18	Pseud	–	0.52	0.50	554	170	ERM + ILM	C3F8	Complete	RD
7	80	Male	20	Pseud	–	0.70	0.60	333	339	ERM + ILM	C3F8	Complete	–
8	61	Female	14	Pseud	–	0.52	0.40	581	347	ERM + ILM	SIVI	Incomplete	–
9	63	Female	14	Pseud	–	0.52	0.52	590	181	ERM + ILM	HAVA	Complete	–
10	65	Female	14	Phakic	–	0.52	0.30	660	333	ERM + ILM	SF6	Incomplete	Cataract
11	67	Male	12	Pseud	–	0.40	0.50	358	291	ERM	HAVA	Complete	–

no, number; BCVA; preop, peroperative; best corrected visual acuity; CRT, central retinal thickness; postop, postoperative; ERM, epiretinal mebrane; ILM, internal limiting membrane

ISSN: 2056-9920