Surgical Versus Medical Treatment for Diabetic Macular Edema: A Review

We aimed to compare the results of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling, an alternative therapeutic strategy, with those of medical treatment for chronic macular edema. We conducted a review of the literature on the microscopic, anatomical, and functional reasons for performing PPV with ILM peeling in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). We searched the PubMed database for articles published between 2000 and 2017. We used the medical subject heading “vitrectomy diabetic macular edema†and the keywords “diabetic macular edemaâ€, “internal limiting membrane peelingâ€, “pars plana vitrectomyâ€, “diabetic retinopathyâ€, and “optical coherence tomographyâ€. Analysis of the literature revealed that cytokines, vascular endothelial growth factor, reactive oxygen species (ROS), and advanced glycation end-products (AGEs) play a unique role in DME. The vitreous cavity serves as a physiological reservoir for all inflammatory molecules. AGE receptors are localized at the footplates of Müller cells and the external limiting membrane (ELM). The footplates of Müller cells are in contact with the ILM, which suggests that they might be responsible for the structural damage (i.e., thickening) observed in the ILM of patients with DME. Therefore, PPV could allow a reduction of cytokines and pro-inflammatory molecules from the vitreous cavity. ILM peeling could eliminate not only the physical traction of a thickened structure, but also the natural reservoir of AGEs, ROS, and inflammatory molecules. PPV with ILM peeling is a surgical option that should be considered when treating patients with chronic DME