[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"conditionNormalized\":\"macular-hole\",\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:macular-hole":28},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,4,0,[8,47,78,107],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":13,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":14,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":15,"minAge":4,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":16,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":19,"phases":20,"briefSummary":22,"conditions":23,"keywords":29,"overallStatus":34,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":35,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":36,"startDateStruct":39,"completionDateStruct":41,"leadSponsor":43,"locationsCount":46},"100643696","comparison-between-outcomes-of-closure-of-idiopathic-macular-hole-using-autologus-tenon-capsule-graft-and-internal-limiting-membrane-flap-techniques-pilot-study-100643696",false,"NCT07633457","Comparison Between Outcomes of Closure of Idiopathic Macular Hole Using Autologus Tenon Capsule Graft and Internal Limiting Membrane Flap Techniques (Pilot Study)","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients diagnosed with idiopathic full-thickness macular hole\n* ≥400 µm in horizontal diameter\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Media opacity preventing adequate OCT\u002FOCTA imaging\n* Other retinal vascular pathology as retinal vascular occlusion\n* Intraoperative complications\n* Signal noise ratio using OCTA \\\u003C6\\\\10\n* Poor fixation of the patient","ALL",{"count":17,"type":18},20,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[21],"NA","The aim of this study is to compare the functional visual outcomes, anatomical closure rate and macular perfusion changes assessed by OCT and OCTA after surgical repair of macular hole using Tenon capsule graft versus ILM flap.",[24,25,26,27,28],"Macular Hole Surgery","ILM Peeling","Tenon Capsule","ILM Flap","Macular Hole",[30,31,32,33],"Macular hole","ILM flap","Tenon capsule","Graft","RECRUITING","2026-06-04",{"date":37,"type":38},"2026-06-08","ACTUAL",{"date":40,"type":38},"2025-11-09",{"date":42,"type":18},"2028-01-01",{"name":44,"class":45},"Ain Shams University","OTHER",1,{"id":48,"slug":49,"hasResults":11,"nctId":50,"briefTitle":51,"officialTitle":52,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":53,"healthyVolunteers":54,"sex":15,"minAge":4,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":55,"targetDuration":57,"studyType":58,"phases":4,"briefSummary":59,"conditions":60,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":68,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":69,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":70,"startDateStruct":72,"completionDateStruct":74,"leadSponsor":76,"locationsCount":4},"100615388","retinal-clinical-assessment-with-ai-derived-quantitative-information-100615388","NCT07291960","Retinal Clinical Assessment With AI-derived Quantitative Information","AI-derived Retinal Quantification Versus Routine Clinical Interpretation in Ophthalmic Assessment: a Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\nClinician Participants (Report Writers)\n\n1. Board-certified ophthalmologists or ophthalmology trainees (registrars or fellows) with clinical experience in interpreting fundus images.\n2. Capable of independently completing retinal clinical reports based on fundus photography.\n3. Willing and able to participate in the study tasks (report writing) under assigned study conditions.\n4. Able to provide informed consent.\n\nExpert Evaluators (Outcome Assessors)\n\n1. Senior ophthalmologists with at least 5 years of post-certification clinical experience.\n2. Not involved in the report-writing stage of the study.\n3. Willing to evaluate de-identified reports across predefined quality dimensions.\n4. Able to provide informed consent.\n\nFundus Images (Data Inputs)\n\n1. Retinal fundus photographs of sufficient quality for clinical interpretation.\n2. Images representing a range of common retinal findings (normal or abnormal).\n3. Previously collected, de-identified images with no patient-identifiable information.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\nClinician Participants\n\n1. Lack of experience in interpreting fundus images (e.g., interns, medical students).\n2. Prior involvement in the development, training, or validation of the AI system being tested.\n3. Inability to complete reporting tasks due to time constraints or technical limitations.\n4. Any condition that may interfere with ability to perform study tasks (e.g., prolonged absence).\n\nExpert Evaluators\n\n1. Participation in the intervention or control reporting arms.\n2. Prior exposure to or involvement in development of the AI system.\n3. Any conflict of interest affecting impartiality of report quality evaluation.\n\nFundus Images\n\n1. Poor-quality images with insufficient clarity for interpretation.\n2. Images containing artifacts or cropping that prevent accurate segmentation or assessment.\n3. Images with any remaining patient identifiers (excluded to maintain confidentiality).",true,{"count":56,"type":18},29,"21 Days","OBSERVATIONAL","This randomized controlled trial evaluates whether providing clinicians with AI-derived quantitative retinal information improves the quality and efficiency of retinal clinical assessment. Participating ophthalmologists and ophthalmology trainees will be randomly assigned to one of two groups. The intervention group will write clinical reports with access to automated quantitative measurements generated from fundus image analysis, including multiple retinal structural and vascular biomarkers. The control group will complete the same reporting tasks using only the original fundus images without AI-generated quantitative information.\n\nAll reports produced by both groups will be de-identified and independently evaluated by a separate panel of senior ophthalmologists who are blinded to group allocation. The expert evaluators will assess report accuracy, completeness, clarity, and overall clinical quality using predefined scoring criteria. The study aims to determine whether access to quantitative retinal biomarkers enhances clinicians' reporting performance and reduces reporting time during retinal assessment tasks.",[61,62,63,64,65,28,66,67],"no Obvious Abnormalities","Diabetic Retinopathy (DR)","AMD","Cup-to-disc Ratio Bigger Than 0.5","Pathological Myopia","Epiretinal Membrane","Retinal Vein Occlusion (RVO)","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2026-04-28",{"date":71,"type":38},"2026-04-29",{"date":73,"type":18},"2026-04-15",{"date":75,"type":18},"2026-05-15",{"name":77,"class":45},"Beijing Tongren Hospital",{"id":79,"slug":80,"hasResults":11,"nctId":81,"briefTitle":82,"officialTitle":83,"acronym":84,"eligibilityCriteria":85,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":15,"minAge":86,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":87,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":19,"phases":89,"briefSummary":90,"conditions":91,"keywords":92,"overallStatus":34,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":97,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":98,"startDateStruct":100,"completionDateStruct":102,"leadSponsor":104,"locationsCount":106},"100585934","no-endotamponade-for-macular-hole-repair-the-nemar-study-100585934","NCT06908824","No Endotamponade for Macular Hole Repair: the NEMAR Study","The No Endotamponade for Macular Hole Repair (NEMAR) Study: An International Multi-center Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Macular Hole Closure Using Internal Limiting Membrane Flap Without Endotamponade Versus Conventional Surgery","NEMAR","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age \\>= 18 years\n* Presence of full thickness macular hole in one eye (defined as full thickness discontinuity of neuro-sensory retina at the macula on optical coherence tomography)\n* Able to comply to post-operative posture\n* VA ≥0.05 and ≤0.8\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Fellow eye enrolled in the study\n* Eyes that underwent previous macular surgery\n* Presence of maculopathy other than macular hole, epi-retinal membrane or myopic maculopathy. For example, age-related macular degeneration, diabetic macular edema or pre-existing macular scar\n* Axial length \\>\u002F= 28mm or presence of significant myopic chorio-retinal atrophy involving the fovea\n* Minimum linear diameter \\>\u002F=800µm\n* Presence of contraindications to intraocular gas, such as advanced glaucoma or uncontrolled glaucoma\n* Significant macular puckering (Govetto staging ≥ stage 2)\n* Patients who are unable to give informed consent\n* Patients who are pregnant","18 Years",{"count":88,"type":18},180,[21],"Full-thickness macular hole (MH) is a common sight threatening macular condition with a prevalence of 3.3 per 1000 individuals. Prompt surgical repair of MH is imperative in preventing irreversible vision loss from MH as the majority of patients would experience progressive loss of central vision, often resulting in visual acuity (VA) of 20\u002F200 or worse and the spontaneous closure rate is less than 10%.\n\nPars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling (with or without ILM flap) and gas tamponade, herein referred to as conventional surgery, is the current standard-of-care surgical technique in repairing MH.\n\nRecently, a novel surgical technique that omits the need of gas tamponade to repair MH has been proposed, early results from retrospective studies were encouraging.\n\nThe purpose of this prospective international multi-centre randomised controlled study is to compare the efficacy and safety of two surgical techniques in treating MH:\n\n1. Conventional surgery: PPV with ILM peeling and gas or silicone oil tamponade\n2. ILM flap with no gas tamponade surgery: PPV with ILM flap with no gas tamponade",[28,24],[28,93,94,95,96],"Vitrectomy","Macular surgery","Internal limiting membrane peeling","Gas tamponade","2025-09-26",{"date":99,"type":38},"2025-09-30",{"date":101,"type":38},"2025-09-16",{"date":103,"type":18},"2027-12-31",{"name":105,"class":45},"Chinese University of Hong Kong",3,{"id":108,"slug":109,"hasResults":11,"nctId":110,"briefTitle":111,"officialTitle":112,"acronym":113,"eligibilityCriteria":114,"healthyVolunteers":54,"sex":15,"minAge":86,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":115,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":58,"phases":4,"briefSummary":117,"conditions":118,"keywords":122,"overallStatus":34,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":126,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":127,"startDateStruct":129,"completionDateStruct":131,"leadSponsor":133,"locationsCount":46},"100241590","discover-study-microscope-integrated-intraoperative-oct-study-100241590","NCT02423213","DISCOVER Study: Microscope-integrated Intraoperative OCT Study","Determination of Feasibility of Intraoperative Spectral Domain Microscope Combined\u002FIntegrated OCT Visualization During En Face Retinal and Ophthalmic Surgery: DISCOVER Study","DISCOVER","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* The study population includes any patient requiring ophthalmic surgery\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Under the age of 18 years.\n* Cognitive\u002FMentally impaired or unable to provide consent",{"count":116,"type":18},3000,"Optical coherence tomography (OCT )provides high resolution information regarding the anatomic structure of the tissues of the eye in a cross-sectional and 3 dimensional view. Much of this information is not able to be visualized by a clinician. Utilizing this information during surgery will allow for the ophthalmic surgeons to better understand how surgical procedures impact the anatomic structure of the eye.\n\nIn this study an OCT device that has been built into the microscope (rather than mounted on the side or held in the surgeon's hand) and will be utilized to take images at various milestones during surgery to assess feasibility and potential utility of this technology. Since it is built into the microscope, there are potential significant advantages over a separate system including increased efficiency, improved working distance, and the ability to visualize tissue-instrument interactions.",[119,120,28,66,121],"Retinal Diseases","Fuchs Endothelial Dystrophy","Retinal Detachment",[123,124,125],"OCT","image-guided surgery","ophthalmic surgery","2025-06-23",{"date":128,"type":38},"2025-06-26",{"date":130,"type":4},"2014-01",{"date":132,"type":18},"2027-01",{"name":134,"class":45},"The Cleveland Clinic"]