Comprehensive Review of Retinal Pseudo-Holes: Clinical Presentation, Diagnosis, Pathophysiology, and Management

January 28, 2025 updated by: Mohammad Reza Tokhmehchi

Clinical Presentation, Diagnostic Approaches, Pathophysiology, and Management of Retinal Pseudo-Holes: a Comprehensive Synthesis of 35 Peer-Reviewed Studies

Retinal pseudo-holes (RPH) are macular abnormalities that mimic macular holes (MH) but lack full-thickness retinal disruption. This systematic review, based on 35 studies, explores their clinical presentation, diagnosis, pathophysiology, and management.

Diagnosis: Differentiating RPH from MH is challenging due to overlapping symptoms such as central scotomas and visual distortion. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) has become the gold standard for diagnosis, surpassing older imaging techniques like fundus photography and fluorescein angiography. OCT provides detailed, non-invasive imaging that helps identify RPH's hallmark feature: a foveal depression without retinal break.

Pathophysiology: RPH is primarily caused by mechanical forces exerted on the macula by epiretinal membranes (ERM) and vitreomacular traction (VMT). These forces distort the retina, creating a pseudo-hole. Risk factors include aging, high myopia, trauma, and diabetes.

Management: Many RPH cases are managed conservatively with regular monitoring, as the condition often remains stable. Surgical intervention, such as pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with membrane peeling, is reserved for symptomatic cases with significant visual impairment. Surgery has shown promising outcomes, with most patients experiencing improved visual acuity.

Research Needs: Further studies are needed to explore the long-term outcomes of RPH, identify factors predicting progression to MH, and assess the utility of advanced imaging techniques like OCT angiography in improving diagnosis and monitoring.

This review underscores the importance of accurate differentiation between RPH and MH to ensure appropriate management and avoid unnecessary treatments.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

This is a REVIEW study on Retinal pseudo-holes.

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

10

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

35

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Studies that directly addressed retinal pseudo-holes, their clinical presentation, diagnostic modalities, pathophysiology, or treatment.
  • Peer-reviewed clinical trials, case reports, observational studies, and reviews.
  • Studies that utilized OCT or other imaging techniques (such as fluorescein angiography or fundus photography) to diagnose retinal pseudo-holes.
  • Studies that were published in English and provided full-text access.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Studies that did not specifically focus on retinal pseudo-holes but instead dealt with other retinal conditions (e.g., full-thickness macular holes, retinal detachment).
  • Studies that were not peer-reviewed (e.g., conference abstracts, opinion pieces).
  • Non-English language studies or those without available full texts.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Retinal Thickness
Time Frame: up to 12 weeks
Measuring retinal thickness using Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) to assess structural changes associated with the severity of the epiretinal membrane. Unit of Measure: Micrometers (µm)
up to 12 weeks

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Visual Acuity
Time Frame: up to 10weeks
Evaluating patients' visual acuity using the LogMAR scale to determine the functional impact of the epiretinal membrane on vision. Unit of Measure: LogMAR (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution)
up to 10weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

June 1, 2024

Primary Completion (Actual)

August 20, 2024

Study Completion (Actual)

September 25, 2024

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

January 12, 2025

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 28, 2025

First Posted (Actual)

March 25, 2025

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

March 25, 2025

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 28, 2025

Last Verified

January 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • IR.GUMS.REC.1400.134

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Epiretinal Membrane

Subscribe