What is the Treatment for Vitreomacular Traction?
October 7, 2010
I’ve recently been diagnosed with vitreomacular traction [Ed. - a condition in which the vitreous gel has an abnormally strong adhesion to the retina]. I was told to wait a couple months and return for follow-up.
My vision seems to be very slowly getting worse as far as reading numbers on my computer and especially black ink on white paper.
What is the difference between this condition and macular degeneration, and are these two conditions ever mistakenly diagnosed one for the other? Is waiting the two months the recommended and optimal treatment? Thank you.
You might also enjoy...
- What Are The Treatment Options for NAION?
- What Are Possible Causes of Red Eye?
- Avastin vs. Lucentis…and the Winner is!
- Vitreo-Macular Traction in Persistent Edema
- What Are Prospects for Success of Cataract Surgery for Patient Also Suffering From Macular Degeneration and Fuchs Dystrophy?
Comments
Jump down to form below to submit your own comments
The usual treatment for vitreomacular traction is vitrectomy. This will cleave the connection between the vitreous and the retina (specifically in the area of the macula). Sometimes, there is an epiretinal membrane associated with this and it, too, may be removed.
Often, many doctors try a short period of observation along with some eye drops.
Vitreomacular traction causes macular swelling. Macular degeneration is completely different although both affect the same area of the retina (the macula). Macular degeneration is an actual disease of the retinal (macular) tissue.
Here is an article I wrote about a year ago about “Everything Macular,”
http://retinaeyedoctor.com/2009/09/everything-macular-what-is-the-macula/
I hope this helped.
Randy
I also have vitreomacular traction, and my ophthalmologist also said vitrectomy was the treatment. But recently another proven alternative has emerged from ThromboGenics, which uses microplasmin to resolve vitreomacular adhesion (traction).
If you Google “ThromboGenics vitreomacular traction” you will find press release that you can for yourself. Does anyone else have a comment on this? My ophthalmologist was totally disinterested since he only does surgery!
I have vitreomacular traction and there is a new non surgical treatment that has gone through stage 3 trials successfully. A company named ThromboGenics has developed the treatment, which involves an injection of microplasmin. ThromboGenics NV is a biopharmaceutical company focused on the discovery and development of innovative treatments for eye disease. You can Google it and read more about the treatment. I’m curious if anyone else has comments on this. It has shown good results, but does not work in all cases.
We have published a blog post on ThromboGenics’ announcement of successful results of its clinical trials testing use of microplasmin injections to treat vitreomacular traction (also known as vitreomacular adhesion) and macular hole. Please visit:
http://eyedocnews.com/003473-will-microplasmin-injections-revolutionize-treatment-of-vitreomacular-adhesion-and-macular-holes/
I am interested in what, if any, long term effects the microplasmin might have on the vitreous and also on the macula. Does anyone have information on that?
I am 55 and have just been diagnosed with early macular degeneration and a VMT psuedo-hole. My doc says it’s called a pseudo-hole because the traction is creating a well-like depression that has not yet torn an actual hole. He says there’s nothing to be done at this stage but let nature take its course, and when/if the pseudo-hole actually tears, it’s damage control time. I don’t like the idea of waiting for something to happen if there’s a procedure or technique that can prevent it. I read a bit about traction release procedures, but it looks like these are done when a hole actually develops, not before? My doctor prescribed I-Cap vitamins and sent me home to wait. I’m not sure if that’s the best course. Any thoughts?
your doctor is right. i see a lot of pseudoholes and the vision is pretty good and certainly not worth the risk of surgery. they can also sometimes spontaneously improve. most surgeons therefore are pretty conservative with pseudoholes. if your macula were otherwise normal, and your vision was like 20/50 or worse, then most surgeons would operate. but if you also have macular degeneration, your doctor must be confident that the pseudohole is only contributing minimally to your decreased vision, and thats why he is conservative.
consider a 2nd opinion from a retina surgeon, and be sure to tell him he will NOT be operating on you even if he feels you need it. this way, you can be confident of an honest opinion.