RetCam与BIO在ROP筛查中的应用效果对比

目的：比较广角数码视网膜成像系统(RetCam)与双目间接检眼镜(BIO)在早产儿视网膜病变(ROP)筛查中的应用效果。

方法：对2014-05/2017-05在我院出生的1 624例3 248眼早产儿进行RetCam与BIO检查，对比两种检查方法对ROP的筛查结果及不良事件发生情况。

结果：早产儿1 624例3 248眼中，RetCam检出ROP患儿196例392眼，BIO检出ROP患儿189例378眼，二者的分期结果与分区病变结果比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)； 以BIO检查结果为标准，RetCam检查的敏感性、特异性、假阳性率、阳性预测值分别为100.00%、99.51%、3.57%、96.43%； RetCam与BIO的不良事件发生率分别为0.18%、0.22%，差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论：RetCam与BIO筛查ROP具有较高一致性，RetCam可以替代BIO作为ROP的筛查方法。

Comparison of wide-angle digital retinal imaging system and binocular indirect ophthalmoscope in retinopathy of prematurity screening

AIM: To compare the application effect on patients with retinopathy of prematurity(ROP)screened by wide-angle digital retinal imaging system(RetCam)and binocular indirect ophthalmoscope(BIO).

METHODS: Totally 1 624 cases(3 248 eyes)of premature infants were detected by RetCam and BIO in our hospital from May 2014 to May 2017. The screening results of ROP and occurrence of adverse events were compared between two checking methods.

RESULTS: In the 1 624 cases(3 248 eyes)of premature infants, 196 cases(392 eyes)of premature infants were detected by RetCam and 189 cases(378 eyes)of premature infants were detected by BIO, there was no statistical significance on staging results and partition pathological results between RetCam and BIO(P>0.05). Taking inspection result of BIO as standard, the sensibility, specificity, false positive rate and positive predictive value was 100.00%, 99.51%, 3.57% and 96.43%, respectively. The adverse event rate of RetCam and BIO was 0.18% and 0.22%, respectively, there was no statistical significance(P>0.05).

CONCLUSION: RetCam and BIO have similar application efficacy for screening ROP, and RetCam could take the place of BIO as the screening method of ROP.