玻璃体腔注射Bevacizumab联合视网膜光凝治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿

目的: 评价玻璃体腔注射1.25mg贝伐单抗(Bevacizum ab)注射液后行黄斑区激光光凝治疗糖尿病性弥漫性黄斑水肿的临床效果。方法: 随机将74例86眼糖尿病性黄斑水肿引起视力下降的患者分成两组,即治疗组和对照组。治疗组43例48眼玻璃体腔注射Bevacizum ab注射液1.25mg,3wk后进行局部或格栅样视网膜光凝。对照组31例38眼单纯玻璃体腔注射Bevacizum ab注射液1.25mg,跟踪观察治疗前、治疗后3,6wk;3mo两组视力情况与视网膜厚度的变化。结果: 两组视力比较,治疗前、治疗后3wk时无统计学意义,两组间治疗后6wk;3mo比较差异有显著性。治疗组黄斑中心凹厚度在治疗前,治疗后3,6wk;3mo分别为395.933±119.784,292.617±39.131,302.350±55.272,314.200±60.528μm。对照组治疗前,治疗后3,6wk;3mo分别为398.734±111.764,301.217±34.231,312.120±53.170,395.145±108.687μm。两组在治疗前、治疗后3wk视网膜厚度无统计学意义,但在治疗后6wk和3mo时差异有统计学意义。结论: 玻璃体腔注射Bevacizum ab后联合黄斑激光光凝治疗糖尿病性弥漫性黄斑水肿更有效,有利于视网膜光凝,并且能提高糖尿病性黄斑水肿患者的视力。     

阿柏西普与雷珠单抗治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿的疗效比较

目的：分析阿柏西普和雷珠单抗对糖尿病性黄斑水肿治疗的疗效。

方法：前瞻性研究。选择2019-11/2020-02于邢台市人民医院眼科首次就诊的糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DME)的患者纳入研究,随机按治疗方式分为阿柏西普组与雷珠单抗组,采用3+PRN(pro re nata)的治疗方案,两次注射时间间隔至少4wk,所有患者均先注射3次,随访时根据患者的最佳矫正视力(BCVA)及黄斑部中心凹视网膜厚度(CFT)的大小决定是否再次注射,患者均完成12mo随访,记录治疗前后两组患者的BCVA、CFT、眼压以及注射次数的变化。

结果：两组患者的BCVA、CFT在术前及术后随访中均有差异(P<0.05),两组间BCVA及CFT随访期间均无差异(P>0.05)。随访结束时,阿柏西普组平均注射次数为6.094±0.689次,雷珠单抗组为7.231±0.652次,比较无差异(t=-6.403,P<0.05)。所有患者均未出现眼部并发症以及全身不良反应。

结论：与玻璃体腔注射雷珠单抗比较,注射阿柏西普注射液治疗DME能取得相似的治疗效果,且注射次数更少。     

阿柏西普和雷珠单抗治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿的疗效

目的:比较阿柏西普和雷珠单抗治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DME)的疗效。方法:前瞻性随机对照试验。纳入2020-06/2021-09于我院确诊的非增殖期糖尿病视网膜病变合并DME的患者35例60眼,均采用3+PRN方案行玻璃体腔注射治疗,其中17例30眼接受阿柏西普治疗(阿柏西普组),18例30眼接受雷珠单抗治疗(雷珠单抗组)。随访12mo,观察两组患者中心凹厚度(CMT)和最佳矫正视力(BCVA)情况,记录玻璃体腔注射次数和并发症发生情况。结果:治疗后1、3、6、12mo,阿柏西普组CMT和BCVA均明显优于雷珠单抗组(均P<0.001)。随访期间,阿柏西普组玻璃体腔注射次数少于雷珠单抗组(4.23±0.86次vs 6.40±0.97次,P<0.05),两组患者均未出现药物相关不良反应、眼内感染、血管栓塞等严重并发症。结论:阿柏西普和雷珠单抗治疗DME均具有明确的疗效和安全性,相较于雷珠单抗,阿柏西普可能是DME患者更有效和方便的治疗选择。     

Factors affecting visual outcomes in patients with diabetic macular edema treated with ranibizumab

Purpose

To identify factors associated with visual outcomes in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) treated with ranibizumab (RBZ) in the Ranibizumab for Edema of the mAcula in Diabetes—Protocol 2 (READ-2) Study.

Patients and methods

Optical coherence tomography scans, fundus photographs, and fluorescein angiograms (FAs) were graded and along with baseline characteristics were correlated with month (M) 24 visual outcome of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) ≤20/100 (poor outcome) vs >20/100 (better outcome).

Results

Of 101 patients with a M20 visit or beyond, 27 (27%) had BCVA ≤20/100. Comparison of patients with or without poor outcome showed mean baseline BCVA of 16.8 letters (20/125) in the former compared with 30.4 letters (20/63; P<0.001). Mean change in BCVA between baseline and M24 was −2.6 letters in the poor outcome group compared with +9.8 letters (P<0.001). Foveal thickness (FTH) at M24 was 374.1 μm in the poor outcome group compared with 268.8 μm (P<0.01), a difference driven by 14 patients with mean FTH of 450.3 μm. Foveal atrophy occurred in 65% (11/17) in the poor outcome group compared with 17%(12/71, P=0.001). Persistent edema was noted in 52% (14/27) of patients with poor outcome. Laser scars near foveal center were significantly more common in patients with poor outcome who did not have edema vs those who did (78% (7/9) vs 23% (3/13) P=0.03).

Conclusion

Poor baseline BCVA (≤20/125) in DME patients predicts poor visual outcome (≤20/100) after 2 years of treatment with RBZ and/or focal/grid laser, often due to foveal atrophy and/or persistent edema.     

玻璃体内注射阿柏西普治疗顽固性糖尿病黄斑水肿的疗效

目的研究玻璃体内注射阿柏西普治疗顽固性糖尿病黄斑水肿的短期效果。方法收集2018年6月至2019年6月来我院眼科就诊的顽固性糖尿病黄斑水肿患者30例(30眼),行玻璃体内注射阿柏西普治疗。治疗前所有患者均接受过至少3次的玻璃体内注射雷珠单抗治疗,随访期为1个月。在术前及术后1个月时,检查患者最佳矫正视力(best corrected vision acuity,BCVA)和眼压,并行黄斑区光学相干断层成像检查,记录黄斑中心区厚度(central macular thickness,CMT)。比较治疗前后各组数据差异。结果 BCVA从阿柏西普治疗前的(0.61±0.26)logMAR提升至治疗后1个月的(0.51±0.19)logMAR,差异有统计学意义(P=0.016)。治疗前CMT为(441.77±108.09)μm,治疗后1个月CMT为(354.47±83.93)μm,差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。治疗前及治疗后1个月眼压相比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。在随访期间未发现任何眼部及全身相关并发症。结论对于雷珠单抗不应答的顽固性糖尿病黄斑水肿患者,转为阿柏西普...     

玻璃体腔内注射抗VEGF药物治疗DME对黄斑区微循环的短期影响

目的：应用光学相干断层血管成像(OCTA)观察康柏西普和阿柏西普治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DME)时,黄斑无血管区面积(FAZ)、形态以及血流密度的短期变化。

方法：选择26例DME患者进行玻璃体腔注射康柏西普或阿柏西普,利用OCTA观察注药前、注药后1、7、30d的FAZ、黄斑无血管弓周长(PERIM)、非圆指数(AI),及中心凹300μm宽度内的血管密度(FD-300)的变化,分析抗VEGF药物对黄斑区微循环的影响。同时观察患者最佳矫正视力(BCVA)和黄斑区中心厚度(CFT),BCVA记录时转换为最小分辨角对数(LogMAR)视力。使用重复测量资料方差分析方法,比较注药前、注药后1、7、30d FAZ、PERIM、AI、FD-300、BCVA、CFT的情况; 采用Bonferroni分析不同时间点差异的两两比较。通过Pearson相关分析用来评估BCVA(LogMAR)的变化与FAZ、CFT相关性。

结果：注射抗VEGF药前FAZ为0.296±0.022mm²,注药后1d检测到FAZ增大到0.339±0.024mm²(P=0.015),术后7、30d FAZ与术前无差异(P=0.084、0.224)。与治疗前比较,术后BCVA有明显变化,CFT下降,抗VEGF治疗有效。PERIM、AI及FD-300在注药前后不同时间差异均不显著(F=2.598,P=0.059; F=0.438,P=0.726; F=0.594,P=0.621)。BCVA(LogMAR)与FAZ、CFT正相关(r=0.273,P=0.005; r=0.200,P=0.042),二者均影响BCVA。

结论：糖尿病性黄斑水肿患者玻璃体腔注射抗VEGF药后1d内FAZ可能短暂变大。注药1wk后FAZ减少,并伴有视力提高。选择适当的OCTA参数能提供可靠的客观测定方法。     

玻璃体内注射贝伐单抗联合视网膜激光光凝治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿

目的：探究玻璃体内注射贝伐单抗联合视网膜激光光凝治疗糖尿病黄斑水肿的治疗效果以及分析此方法的安全性。
　　方法：选取2014-02/2015-03期间于我院确诊并治疗的69例82眼糖尿病黄斑水肿,随机平均分为对照组与观察组,每组41眼。观察组患者行玻璃体内注射贝伐单抗联合视网膜激光光凝治疗,对照组行单纯视网膜激光光凝治疗。治疗后观察并对比两组患者最佳矫正视力情况(BCVA)、黄斑中心凹厚度(CMT)、荧光素眼底血管造影改变( FFA)以及眼压变化等并发症情况。
　　结果：观察组于治疗后1、3、6 lo BCVA、CMT较治疗前有明显改善( P<0.05);对照组治疗前后BCVA未见明显提高(P>0.05),CMT较治疗前有所降低(P<0.05),但FFA结果6 lo后反弹。观察组较对照组在BCVA、CMT方面差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05),且两组治疗后1、3、6lo均未发生眼部及全身性并发症。
　　结论：玻璃体内注射贝伐单抗联合视网膜激光光凝治疗糖尿病黄斑水肿治疗效果更优,而且基本无眼部及全身性并发症。     

Subthreshold micropulse laser versus intravitreal anti-VEGF for diabetic macular edema patients with relatively better visual acuity

AIM: To compare the effects of yellow (577 nm) subthreshold micropulse laser (SML) and intravitreal (IV) anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) with relatively better visual acuity [best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) ≤0.15 logMAR]. METHODS: The medical records of 76 eyes of 47 patients underwent IV (0.5 mg) anti-VEGF injection or SML for the DME with relatively better BCVA were reviewed. The IV group received three consecutive monthly IV anti-VEGF injections, then were retreated as needed. The laser treatment group was treated at baseline and 3mo, and then retreated at 6 and 9mo if needed. All participants were followed up for one year. The mean BCVA and mean central macular thickness (CMT) values changes over the follow-up were evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-four and 23 patients were assigned to the SML and IV subgroups, respectively. The mean number of treatments was 3.64±0.76 in SML group and 5.85±1.38 in IV group (P<0.05). The subgroups were similar with regard to the mean BCVA score at baseline and at the 1st and 3rd months, but the score of SML group was better than that of IV group at the 6th, 9th, and 12th months (P<0.05). The decrease in the mean CMT values from baseline values was higher in SML group at the 6th, 9th, and 12th months (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Yellow SML treatment is superior to IV anti-VEGF injection in DME patients with relatively better BCVA for increasing visual acuity and decreasing CMT at 6, 9, and 12mo. SML can be a good alternative first-line therapy for DME with BCVA ≤0.15 logMAR.     

Observational study of subclinical diabetic macular edema

Purpose

To determine the rate of progression of eyes with subclinical diabetic macular edema (DME) to clinically apparent DME or DME necessitating treatment during a 2-year period.

Methods

In all, 43 eyes from 39 study participants with subclinical DME, defined as absence of foveal center edema as determined with slit lamp biomicroscopy but a center point thickness (CPT) between 225 and 299 μm on time domain (Stratus, Carl Zeiss Meditec) optical coherence tomography (OCT) scan, were enrolled from 891 eyes of 582 subjects screened. Eyes were evaluated annually for up to 2 years for the primary outcome, which was an increase in OCT CPT of at least 50 μm from baseline and a CPT of at least 300 μm, or treatment for DME (performed at the discretion of the investigator).

Results

The cumulative probability of meeting an increase in OCT CPT of at least 50 μm from baseline and a CPT of at least 300 μm, or treatment for DME was 27% (95% confidence interval (CI): 14%, 38%) by 1 year and 38% (95% CI: 23%, 50%) by 2 years.

Conclusions

Although subclinical DME may be uncommon, this study suggests that between approximately one-quarter and one-half of eyes with subclinical DME will progress to more definite thickening or be judged to need treatment for DME within 2 years after its identification.     

糖尿病黄斑水肿OCT中高反射灶与视力预后的关系

目的 分析糖尿病黄斑水肿患者相干光断层扫描（OCT）中不同位置的高反射灶是否与视力预后相关,并观察抗VEGF治疗后OCT中高反射灶的变化情况。设计 回顾性病例系列。研究对象 2013年2月至2016年8月糖尿病黄斑水肿经抗血管内皮生长因子（VEGF）治疗的患者28例。方法  所有入选病例在基线及末次访视时,均行最佳矫正视力、眼压、裂隙灯、间接检眼镜、彩色眼底照相、荧光素眼底血管造影及OCT检查。采用Heidelberg Spectralis OCT获得通过中心凹的黄斑区OCT图像,计数所扫范围内97幅B扫描中视网膜各层和玻璃体腔所有高反射灶的数量。平均随访（4.96±1.37）个月。分析不同位置高反射灶数量与视力预后的相关性。主要指标 基线及末次随访的最佳矫正视力、中心视网膜厚度、视网膜各层高反射灶的数量、所扫玻璃体腔高反射灶数量与所扫玻璃体腔总面积的比值（RATIO）。结果 内层视网膜中高反射灶数量为（156.00±118.76）个,外层视网膜为（3.79±5.25）个,RATIO为0.05±0.06。28眼（100%）均能在内层视网膜见到高反射灶,17眼（60.71%）在外层视网膜可见高反射灶。末次随访视力与基线期外层视网膜中高反射灶的数量呈明显的负相关（r=-0.506, P=0.006）,与RATIO也呈负相关（r=0.462, P=0.013）,而与内层视网膜中高反射灶的数量不相关（r=-0.163, P=0.408）。经抗VEGF治疗后内层视网膜及外层视网膜中高反射灶的数量均明显减少,而RATIO无明显变化。结论 在经抗VEGF治疗的糖尿病黄斑水肿中,外层视网膜高反射灶的数量与视力预后呈明显负相关,而内层视网膜内高反射灶数量则与视力预后不相关。     

糖尿病黄斑水肿的治疗进展

糖尿病性视网膜病变( diabetic retinopathy,DR)是一种严重的致盲性眼病,糖尿病黄斑水肿( diabetic lacular edela,DME)可发生在DR的任一时期,常常引起不易逆转的视力丧失,随着发病机制研究的不断深入,在运用传统激光治疗的同时,新兴的抗炎、抗VEGF药物治疗已取得很大进展,微创技术的革新为手术治疗亦提供更大便利,多种治疗方式的联合应用,也成为治疗的主要趋势。我们对目前DME的主要治疗进展进行综述。     

Intravitreal bevacizumab with or without triamcinolone for refractory diabetic macular edema; a placebo-controlled,randomized clinical trial

Purpose To evaluate the effect of three intravitreal injections of bevacizumab (IVB) alone or combined with triamcinolone (IVT) in the first injection for treatment of refractory diabetic macular edema (DME). Methods In this prospective, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial, 115 eyes of 101 patients with refractory DME were included. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of the three study arms: 1) three injections of IVB (1.25 mg/0.05 ml) at 6-week intervals, 2) combined IVB and IVT (1.25 mg/0.05 ml and 2 mg/0.05 ml respectively) followed by two injections of IVB at 6-week intervals, and 3) sham injection (control group). The primary outcome measure was change in central macular thickness (CMT). Secondary outcome measures were change in best-corrected logMAR visual acuity (BCVA ) and incidence of potential adverse events. Results Central macular thickness was reduced significantly in both the IVB and IVB/IVT groups. At week 24, CMT change compared to the baseline was −95.7 μm (95% CI, −172.2 to −19.26) in the IVB group, −92.1 μm (95% CI, −154.4 to −29.7) in the IVB/IVT group, and 34.9 μm (95% CI, 7.9 to 61.9) in the control group. There was a significant difference between the IVB and control groups (P = 0.012) and between the IVB/IVT and control groups (P = 0.022). Improvement of BCVA was initiated at weeks 6 and 12 in the IVB/IVT and IVB groups respectively. In terms of BCVA change compared to the baseline at 24 weeks, the differences between the IVB and control groups (P = 0.01) and also between the IVB/IVT and control groups (P = 0.006) were significant. No significant differences were detected in the changes of CMT and BCVA between the IVB and IVB/IVT groups (P = 0.99). Anterior chamber reaction was noticed in eight (19.5%) and seven (18.9%) eyes respectively in the IVB and IVB/IVT groups the day after injection, and it resolved with no sequel. Elevation of IOP occurred in three eyes (8.1%) in the IVB/IVT group. Conclusion Three consecutive intravitreal injections of bevacizumab had a beneficial effect on refractory DME in terms of CMT reduction and BCVA improvement. Addition of triamcinolone in the first injection seemed to induce earlier visual improvement; however, it did not show any significant additive effect later during follow-up. The 6-week result of this study was presented as a paper at the Annual Meeting of American Academy of Ophthalmology, November 2006, Las Vegas, NV, USA. The authors have no proprietary interest in this study. The authors have full control of all primary data, and they agree to allow Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology to review their data upon request. Clinical Trial registration reference number: NCT00370422 (ClinicalTrials.gov).     

Axial and para-axial fluorophotometry in diabetic macular edema

The vitreous fluorophotometric examinations were used in nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy to recognize early diabetic macular edema. Thanks to additional fixation light, axial and para-axial fluorophotometry in patients with nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy was achieved (Fluorotron Master, Coherent). The angle of deviation from the foveal scan (f) was 10 degrees in temporal (t) and nasal (n) directions. In case of non clinically significant macular edema, the posterior vitreous penetration ratio (PVPR) in the foveal scan (f) was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than in the other results (trend PVPRt PVPRn).     

Prevalence of and risk factors for diabetic macular edema in a northeastern Chinese population

AIM:To estimate the prevalence of diabetic macular edema(DME) and clinically significant macular edema(CSME),and to assess their risk factors in a population with type 2 diabetic mellitus(T2DM) located in northeast China.METHODS:Patients were included from the Fushun Diabetic Retinopathy Cohort Study(FS-DIRECT),a community-based study conducted in northeast China.The presence of DME and CSME was determined by the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study(ETDRS) retinopathy scale of fundus photographs.The age-standardized prevalence of DME and CSME was estimated.The association between DME/CSME and risk factors was analyzed in a multivariate Logistical analysis.RESULTS:A total of 292(15.4%) and 166(8.8%) patients were diagnosed as DME and CSME,yielding the age and sex standardized prevalence of 13.5%(95%CI:11.9%-15.0%),and 7.1%(95%CI:5.9%-8.3%),respectively.Female patients had a higher prevalence of DME compared to their male counterparts(15.7% vs 10.4%,P=0.03).Multivariable Logistic regression analysis showed that younger age,insulin use,proteinuria,longer duration of diabetes,and higher glycosylated hemoglobin A1c,were associated with the prevalence of DME and CSME.Patients with higher fasting plasma glucose,systolic blood pressure,and blood urea nitrogen were also found to be associated with DME.CONCLUSION:Early fundus screening in diabetic patients is invaluable and given the relatively high prevalence of DME and CSME in this study cohort,those with a high risk of sight threatening maculopathy would invariably benefit from earlier detection.     

糖尿病黄斑水肿的处理

糖尿病视网膜病变是工作年龄人群致盲重要原因,而糖尿病黄斑水肿是引起糖尿病患者视力下降的主要原因,早期发现,适当治疗能有效减少因糖尿病性黄斑水肿引起的视力丧失。目前光凝是治疗糖尿病黄斑水肿最有效的方法。对有些病人,玻璃体切割术被证明是有效的。     

Dexamethasone intravitreal implant (Ozurdex) in diabetic macular edema: real-world data versus clinical trials outcomes

AIM: To investigate the safety and efficacy of intravitreal dexamethasone implants (Ozurdex®/DEX) in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) either naïve or non-naïve to anti-VEGF therapies who switched to DEX implant independent of response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGFs). METHODS: This was an audit retrospective review of medical records of patients with DME who switched to the DEX intravitreal implant. Patients were divided into 2 groups: patients naïve to antiangiogenic therapy and patients who were previously treated with anti-VEGFs. Data regarding demographics, changes in mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and intraocular pressure (IOP) was collected over 6mo. The demographic data mean changes in BCVA, CMT, and IOP were compared. Six-month follow-up data of 47 patients (57 eyes), who either switched to DEX implant irrespective of response to previous treatments or were treatment naïve before receiving DEX implant, was collected. RESULTS: Improvement in mean BCVA was observed from 1-4mo after injection with a decreased effect at month 6 as expected, with better outcomes in naïve compared to non-naïve patients. A statistically relevant decrease in mean CMT was observed during the follow-up period. An increase in mean IOP was observed in the first 2mo after DEX therapy. The mean number of injections of the overall population during the 6mo was 1.3. A subgroup analysis showed no relevant difference between phakic versus pseudophakic patients relative to measured outcomes. There was no cataract progression during the follow-up period and no adverse events reported. CONCLUSION: This real-life setting study shows that intravitreal DEX implant is effective and safe. The timings of greater therapeutic impact are concordant with previous studies and suggest that earlier treatment with corticosteroids may have an additional benefit in naïve patients.     

糖尿病性黄斑水肿的激光治疗

目的观察激光治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿（DME）的疗效。设计回顾性临床研究。研究对象DME患者97例（133眼），其中局限水肿92眼，弥漫性水肿41眼。方法局限水肿行微血管瘤或扩张的毛细血管直接光凝。弥漫水肿行C形格栅或环形格栅光凝。主要指标视力和眼底荧光素血管造影。结果局限水肿中视力提高19眼（20．7％），视力不变63眼（68．5％），视力下降10眼（10．9％）。弥漫水肿中视力提高3眼（7．3％），视力不变27眼（65．9％），视力下降11眼（26.8％）（两组视力变化，χ^2=3．653，P=0．056）。局限水肿中水肿消退24眼（26．1％），水肿减轻48眼（52．2％），水肿未退20眼（21．7％）。弥漫水肿中水肿消退5眼（12．2％），水肿减轻18眼（43．9％），水肿未退18眼（43．9％）（两组水肿消退，）[χ^2=6．826，P=0．009）。结论激光治疗DME有效，局限性黄斑水肿比弥漫性黄斑水肿效果好。     

玻璃体腔注射Avastin联合黄斑格栅样光凝治疗DME的临床观察

目的:观察玻璃体腔注射avastin联合黄斑格栅样光凝治疗糖尿病黄斑水肿(diabetic macular edema,DME)的效果。方法:经眼底荧光造影(FFA)及相干光断层扫描(OCT)确诊为糖尿病黄斑水肿的患者21例29眼,给予玻璃体腔注射avastin1.5mg后1wk行黄斑格栅样光凝。所有患者治疗前及治疗后1,3,6,12mo均行眼底、最佳矫正视力(best corrected visual acuity,BCVA)、OCT检查,随访时间6～12mo。结果:末次随访时,自觉症状(包括视物变形、中心暗影)消失或改善者24眼(83%),不变者5眼(17%)。视力提高2行以上者21眼(72%),视力提高1～2行者6眼(21%),视力不变者2眼(7%),无视力下降者。其中,术前BCVA:0.05～0.3(logMAR值:平均0.66±0.19),术后BCVA:0.05～0.8(logMAR值:平均0.31±0.18)(P<0.01)。术前平均眼压为14.33±0.62mmHg,术后平均眼压为15.28±0.49mmHg(P>0.05)。OCT检查示25眼黄斑水肿明显改善(86%),其中减少30%以上者20眼(69%),减少29%～10%者7眼(24%),减少10%以下者2眼(7%)。黄斑中心凹视网膜厚度:术前平均为:450.72±74.22μm,术后平均为:283.55±44.43μm(P<0.01)。结论:玻璃体腔注射avastin联合黄斑格栅样光凝治疗糖尿病黄斑水肿疗效显著,可明显提高视力,消除或改善黄斑水肿。但尚需进一步大样本的临床随机对照研究来证实。     

阿柏西普治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿患者多焦视网膜电图明视负反应变化

目的:观察糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DME)患者接受阿柏西普治疗前后多焦视网膜电图(mf-ERG)明视负反应(PhNR)的变化。方法:回顾性队列研究。收集2019-05/2022-06在武汉大学附属爱尔眼科医院(武汉爱尔眼科医院)就诊的DME患者37例37眼,每月注射阿柏西普0.05mL,连续注射3mo。并选取排除相关眼部疾病的体检正常者20例20眼作为对照组。比较两组参与研究者治疗前后mf-ERG的PhNR振幅,最佳矫正视力(BCVA)(LogMAR)、中央视网膜厚度(CRT)、黄斑区毛细血管丛血管密度(CPVD)。结果:治疗前DME患者mf-ERG PhNR振幅(201.69±80.92nV)明显低于正常对照组(398.87±77.92nV)(P<0.01)。治疗后6mo DME患者mf-ERG的PhNR平均振幅与治疗前明显升高(P=0.036),但在治疗后6mo时仍明显低于正常对照组(P=0.031)。治疗后6mo DME患者BCVA(LogMAR)从0.64±1.33提高到0.37±1.39(P=0.021),CPVD较治疗前明显增加(P=0.029)。治疗后6mo DME患者m...