A 77 y old lady with cataract surgery 11 y ago showed with a visual loss from 0.9 to 0.4. Latanaprost because of glaucoma, clinically presumed macular edema. She was refered and very surprisingly in angiography no edema was seen.

Question: why a clinical edema, but FA no edema? The aroused doctor wasn’t happy with the retina and asked for OCT. An ERFP and a nearly full thickness hole were detected due to myopic staphylomatous enlargement of posterior sclera and traction, a retinoschisis in addition. Well edema, but no exudative one.

Answer: traction & myopic retinoschisis! Vitrectomy and peeling resulted in a visual gain from 0.4 to 0.8; no latanaprost effect!