NCT04498624|UnknownDMC
Inverted Flap Versus Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling in Small Full Thickness Macular Holes
Vitrectomy and Inverted Flap or Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling in Small Full Thickness Macular Holes
Loading search results
Vitrectomy and Inverted Flap or Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling in Small Full Thickness Macular Holes
Sponsor study identifier
interventional
40
1 country
1
Study Start
May 1, 2020
Actual (reported)Primary Completion
May 1, 2021
Estimated (date passed)This estimate has passed. The registry has not confirmed an actual date for this milestone.
Study Completion
May 1, 2021
Estimated (date passed)This estimate has passed. The registry has not confirmed an actual date for this milestone.
Primary outcome: difference of microperimetry retinal sensitivity after primary vitrectomy for idiopathic full thickness macular holes with inverted flap technique versus internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling technique Secondary outcomes: difference of visual change after primary vitrectomy for idiopathic full thickness macular holes with inverted flap technique versus internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling technique; difference in closure rate after primary vitrectomy for idiopathic full thickness macular holes with inverted flap technique versus internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling technique
Registry-reported information. Elapsed time and enrollment totals alone do not measure study progress or recruitment pace.
May 1, 2021
Estimated (date passed)This estimate has passed. The registry has not confirmed an actual date for this milestone.
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Some registry-reported names shown below are not yet linked in this graph.
Dates and qualifiers reported by the registry. Estimated dates do not confirm that a milestone has occurred.
May 1, 2020
Actual (reported)July 22, 2020
Actual (reported)August 4, 2020
Actual (reported)May 1, 2021
Estimated (date passed)This estimate has passed. The registry has not confirmed an actual date for this milestone.
May 1, 2021
Estimated (date passed)This estimate has passed. The registry has not confirmed an actual date for this milestone.
Microperimetry retinal sensitivity
Difference of microperimetry retinal sensitivity after primary vitrectomy for idiopathic full thickness macular holes with inverted flap technique versus internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling technique
3 months
Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA)
3 months
Closure rate
3 months
full thickness macular hole surgery
full thickness macular hole surgery
Registry-reported names are shown in full. Names without a link have not yet been matched to a Syfrah profile.
A.O.U. Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino
Torino, 10126, Italy
Ventre L, Fallico M, Longo A, Parisi G, Russo A, Bonfiglio V, Marolo P, Caselgrandi P, Avitabile T, Borrelli E, Reibaldi M. CONVENTIONAL INTERNAL LIMITING MEMBRANE PEELING VERSUS INVERTED FLAP FOR SMALL-TO-MEDIUM IDIOPATHIC MACULAR HOLE: A Randomized Trial. Retina. 2022 Dec 1;42(12):2251-2257. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000003622. Epub 2022 Sep 6.
First Submitted
July 22, 2020
First Posted
August 4, 2020
Study Start
May 1, 2020
Actual (reported)Primary Completion
May 1, 2021
Estimated (date passed)Intraocular Gas Tamponade for Treatment of Large Idiopathic Macular Holes
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
This estimate has passed. The registry has not confirmed an actual date for this milestone.
Study Completion
May 1, 2021
Estimated (date passed)This estimate has passed. The registry has not confirmed an actual date for this milestone.
Last Updated
August 4, 2020
Record last verified: 2020-08
Download the complete ClinicalTrials.gov record imported by Syfrah, including fields not shown in this page. The registry may contain a newer revision.
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov.
JSON downloads include source attribution and retrieval details alongside the unchanged original record or the separately normalized values.
Source retrieved: