RANDOMIZED TRIAL COMPARING MICROSERRATED VERSUS CONVENTIONAL INTERNAL LIMITING MEMBRANE FORCEPS FOR INTERNAL LIMITING MEMBRANE PEELING

PURPOSE: To evaluate anatomic outcomes and surgeon response following the use of microserrated (Sharkskin, Alcon, Forth Worth, TX) internal limiting membrane (ILM) forceps compared with conventional (Grieshaber; Alcon) ILM forceps for peeling of the ILM. METHODS: Patients were prospectively assigned in a 1:1 randomized fashion to undergo ILM peeling using microserrated forceps or conventional forceps. Rates of retinal hemorrhages, deep retinal grasps, ILM regrasping, time to ILM removal, and surgeon questionnaire comparing the use of microserrated and conventional ILM forceps were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 90 eyes of 90 patients were included in this study. The mean number of deep retinal grasps was higher in the conventional forceps group (1.51 ± 1.70 vs. 0.33 ± 0.56, respectively [P < 0.0001]). The mean number of failed ILM grasps was higher with conventional forceps (6.62 ± 3.51 vs. 5.18 ± 2.06 [P = 0.019]). Microserrated forceps provided more comfortability (lower number) in initiating the ILM flap (2.16 ± 0.85 vs. 1.56 ± 0.76, P < 0.001), comfortability in regrasping the ILM flap (2.51 ± 1.01 vs. 1.98 ± 0.89, P = 0.01), and comfortability in completing the ILM flap (2.42 ± 1.03 vs. 1.84 ± 1.02, P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Surgeons utilizing the microserrated forceps experienced fewer deep retina grasps and fewer failed ILM grasps compared with conventional ILM forceps. The microserrated forceps was also a more favorable experience subjectively among the surgeons.