@margieb58 I guess your doctor is like mine, saying that there is nothing that can be done.

There is an article called "Why surgeons are peeling fewer ERMs". Being a new member, I'm not allowed to post links here.

This is the section that interests me:

[begin quote]
At first glance, Dr. Shakoor doesn’t like accepting the label of idiopathic ERM, as common as it may be. He approaches ERM patients with what he considers a healthy degree of skepticism, seeking answers to questions.

“You’ll find that a lot of these patients actually do have an underlying process,” he says. “You want to look specifically for inflammatory or vascular disease. Specifically, I want to find out if the patient has uveitis or retinal vasculitis. Does he or she have a history of endophthalmitis? I want to know if a vein occlusion is involved. How about microvascular disease? Does the patient have diabetes? Those are the issues you should explore.

“If there’s an active disease process going on, including uveitis, then it should be controlled before a decision is made on whether to do a surgical procedure such as an ERM peel,” he says.

Failing to identify another active process will increase the chance of ERM recurrence or a recurrence of inflammation that leads to other structural damage, he points out. “If you have a patient who has any inflammation, bringing that inflammation under control before surgery is very important,” he adds. “You don’t want to operate on eyes affected by an inflammatory process.”
[End quote]

Although it mainly talks about preventing a recurring ERM, I guess the same concept can be applied to stop or slow down the progression of ERM. It seems that most retinal specialists are not concerned of the underlying condition. Why not?