Eye surgery showdown: which technique best fixes macular holes?

NCT ID NCT07633457

Recruiting now Disease control Sponsor: Ain Shams University Source: ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

First seen Jun 25, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026 · Updated 1 time

Summary

This pilot study compares two surgical techniques for closing idiopathic macular holes: using a Tenon capsule graft versus the standard internal limiting membrane (ILM) flap. Twenty participants will undergo vitrectomy and be assigned to one of the two groups. The study will measure visual improvement and hole closure rates using advanced imaging.

What this could mean

Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only — not medical advice or a prediction.

Active substance: Tenon capsule graft (autologous tissue) and internal limiting membrane flap (surgical technique)
What this could lead to: If successful, this could show that using a Tenon capsule graft is a safe and effective alternative to the standard ILM flap technique for closing macular holes.
What could go wrong: This is a very small pilot study (20 people) with no blinding or randomization details. It only compares two surgical methods, so results may not apply to all patients or surgeons.

This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.

Get updates

Get notified about this study

Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for ILM FLAP are added.

Our safety recommendation!

By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use

Conditions

The condition(s) this trial relates to.

macular holes retinal perforation

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

ILM FLAP ILM PEELING MACULAR HOLE MACULAR HOLE SURGERY TENON CAPSULE

Contacts and locations

Locations

Ain Shams University
RECRUITING

Cairo, Abbassia, Egypt

More trials for these conditions

Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.