|
|||||
|
|
| 阈下微脉冲激光与氩离子激光治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿的临床随机对照研究 | |
| 引用本文： | 谢婷玉,郭乔茜,王燕,王清,陈雪艺. 阈下微脉冲激光与氩离子激光治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿的临床随机对照研究[J]. 国际眼科杂志, 2013, 13(12): 2370-2372 |
| 作者姓名： | 谢婷玉 郭乔茜 王燕 王清 陈雪艺 |
| 作者单位： | 830054 中国新疆维吾尔族自治区乌鲁木齐,新疆医科大学第一附属医院眼科;830054 中国新疆维吾尔族自治区乌鲁木齐,新疆医科大学第一附属医院眼科;830054 中国新疆维吾尔族自治区乌鲁木齐,新疆医科大学第一附属医院眼科;830054 中国新疆维吾尔族自治区乌鲁木齐,新疆医科大学第一附属医院眼科;830054 中国新疆维吾尔族自治区乌鲁木齐,新疆医科大学第一附属医院眼科 |
| 基金项目： | 乌鲁木齐科技局基金(No.T101310005) |
| 摘 要： | 目的:比较阈下微脉冲激光(波长810nm)同氩离子激光(波长514nm)治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿的疗效。方法:采用临床随机对照研究的方法对84例99眼进行分组,并分别行810nm激光与514nm激光,治疗后随访6mo,行最佳矫正视力、FFA、OCT检查,评估疗效。结果:50眼及49眼分别完成了810nm激光及514nm激光治疗,治疗后随访结果显示:无论810nm还是514nm激光均能稳定及提高视力,二组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);治疗前后视网膜厚度及黄斑水肿均有所改善,且自身治疗前后差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),二组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:无论810nm激光还是514nm激光均可以一定程度的稳定及提高视力,且对糖尿病性黄斑水肿治疗有效,二者间的差异无统计学意义。 |
| 关 键 词： | 阈下微脉冲激光 氩离子激光 糖尿病性黄斑水肿 |
| 收稿时间： | 2013-10-08 |
| 修稿时间： | 2013-11-19 |
Randomized, controlled clinical trial comparison of SDM laser versus argon ion laser in diabetic macular edema |
|
| Ting-Yu Xie,Qiao-Qian Guo,Yan Wang,Qing Wang and Xue-Yi Chen. Randomized, controlled clinical trial comparison of SDM laser versus argon ion laser in diabetic macular edema[J]. International Eye Science, 2013, 13(12): 2370-2372 | |
| Authors: | Ting-Yu Xie Qiao-Qian Guo Yan Wang Qing Wang Xue-Yi Chen |
| Affiliation: | Department of Ophthalmology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China;Department of Ophthalmology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China;Department of Ophthalmology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China;Department of Ophthalmology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China;Department of Ophthalmology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China |
| Abstract: | AIM: To compare the efficacy of subthreshold micropulse diode(SDM)laser treatment and argon ion laser treatment for diabetic macular edema(DME). METHODS: A prospective, randomized controlled trial was carried out in 84 patients(99 eyes), in which, 49 eyes received argon ion laser treatment and 50 eyes received SDM laser treatment. The changes in best corrected visual acuity(BCVA), baseline fluorescein angiography and optic coherence tomography measurements were evaluated in both groups. Follow-up visit was over 6 months from baseline. RESULTS: Ninety-nine eyes(84 patients )complete the study. Six months after treatment, the BCVA improved 22.4% and 20.0% eyes in argon ion laser group and SDM laser group respectively. 55.1% and 58.0% eyes received steady BCVA. Edema partial regression was accounted for 49% in argon ion laser group, while that was 56% in SDM laser group. No statistically significant changes were found in each group. CONCLUSION: No matter argon ion laser or SDM laser is effective to keep or improve the VA in DME. After 6-month follow-up, there is no statistically significant difference between them. |
| Keywords: | argon ion laser SDM laser diabetic macular edema |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 等数据库收录！ | |
| 点击此处可从《国际眼科杂志》浏览原始摘要信息 | |
| 点击此处可从《国际眼科杂志》下载全文 | |