糖尿病黄斑水肿应用玻璃体内注射雷珠单抗、曲安奈德的疗效分析

目的 比较玻璃体内注射雷珠单抗、曲安奈德在糖尿病黄斑水肿中的临床疗效.方法 收集本院2014年10月至2015年10月入院的80例糖尿病黄斑水肿患者,随机分为两组,雷珠单抗组患者给予雷珠单抗治疗,曲安奈德组患者给予曲安奈德治疗,比较两组患者治疗前后最佳矫正视力、RNV渗透面积、黄斑区中心视网膜厚度、眼压与并发症等.结果 雷珠单抗组患者BCVA为(0.556±0.155),显著高于曲安奈德组的(0.409±0.143);RNV渗透面积为(5.405±3.274),显著低于曲安奈德组的(8.332±4.058);雷珠单抗组患者CMT为(289.231±64.040) μm,显著低于曲安奈德组的(370.127±88.172)μm;雷珠单抗组患者治疗后眼压为(15.157±2.351) mmHg,显著低于曲安奈德组(17.264±3.197)mmHg;两组比较,t=4.4897、3.550、4.695、3.358,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.01).结论 玻璃体内注射雷珠单抗在糖尿病黄斑水肿中的临床疗效更为显著,安全性较高,具有借鉴性.

Intravitreal injection of ranibizumab versus triamcinolone acetonide for diabetic macular edema

Objective To explore the clinical efficacy of the intravitreal injection of ranibizumab versus triamcinolone acetonide for diabetic macular edema.Methods 80 patients with diabetic macular edema treated at our hospital from October,2014 to October,2015 were randomly divided into a ranibizumab group,treated with ranibizumab,and a triamcinolone acetonide group,treated with triamcinolone acetonide.The BCVA,RNV penetation area,the retina macular thickness of central area,intraocular pressure,and complications were compared between these two groups.Results After the treatment,the BCVA,RNV penetration area,CMT,and IOP were (0.556±0.155),(5.405±3.274) μm,(289.231±64.040),and (15.157±2.351) mmHg in the the ranibizumab group and were (0.409±0.143),(8.332±4.058),(370.127±88.172) μ m,and (17.264±3.197) mmHg in the triamcinolone acetonide group,with statistical differences (t=4.489 7,3.550 0,4.695 0,and 3.358 0,P ＜ 0.01).Conclusions The intravitreal injection ofranibizumab for diabetic macular edema is more significantly effective and safer than the injection of triamcinolone acetonide,so it of reference.