Turkish Abstract Abstract Free Full Text English Similar Articles Mail to Author

¹Department of Ophthalmology, Universitas Prima Indonesia, Medan, Indonesia
²Vitreoretina Division, Sabang-Merauke Eye Center, Medan, Indonesia
³Vitreoretina Division, Netra Eye Clinic, Bandung, Indonesia
⁴Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Padjajaran, Bandung
⁵Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Indonesia ? Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Jakarta, Indonesia
⁶Vitreoretinal Division, Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Indonesia ? Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Jakarta, Indonesia DOI : 10.37845/ret.vit.2025.34.48 Diabetic macular edema (DME) is one of the common features and leading causes of visual disturbance in diabetic retinopathy (DR). Although anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections remain the gold standard for therapy, vitrectomy has its own significant role with various indications. With growing advancement of internal limiting membrane (ILM) visualization and surgical instrumentation, some surgeons might routinely perform ILM peeling during vitrectomy. ILM peeling during vitrectomy has shown benefits in tractional DME; however, its role in nontractional DME remains controversial. To our knowledge, there are few studies focusing on ILM peeling and its role specifically in nontractional DME. This review aims to comprehensively examine and synthesize the existing literature. Published clinical studies show conflicting results, with some showing anatomical improvements while others suggesting some level of functional improvement. In the absence of definitive evidence favoring one approach, both the decision to perform or forego ILM peeling in nontractional DME can be justified. Further comparative clinical trials focusing on ILM peeling in nontractional DME are warranted to guide future decision making. Keywords : ILM peeling; vitrectomy; diabetic macular edema; nontractional diabetic macular edema; diabetic retinopathy