文章摘要
不同方向撕除内界膜方式对特发性黄斑裂孔术后视网膜位移的影响
Different internal limiting membrane peeling pattern on retinal displacement after closure of idiopathic macular hole
投稿时间:2019-01-12  修订日期:2019-01-20
DOI:
中文关键词: 内界膜  特发性黄斑裂孔  视网膜位移  玻璃体切割术。
英文关键词: Internal limiting membrane  Idiopathic macular hole  Retinal displacement  Vitrectomy
基金项目:国家重点研发计划(2017YFA0104101)
作者单位E-mail
李元龙 南京医科大学第一附属医院 1561054256@qq.com 
郑欣华 南京医科大学第一附属医院  
黄军龙 南京医科大学第一附属医院  
苏筠 南京医科大学第一附属医院  
胡仔仲 南京医科大学第一附属医院  
谢平 南京医科大学第一附属医院  
刘庆淮 南京医科大学第一附属医院 liuqh@njmu.edu.cn 
摘要点击次数: 53
全文下载次数: 0
中文摘要:
      目的:比较玻璃体切割切术中不同方向撕除内界膜对特发性黄斑裂孔愈合后视网膜位移、视功能的影响。 方法:单盲、前瞻性、随机对照临床研究。纳入特发性黄斑裂孔患者25例(25眼),按照术中内界膜(ILM)撕除方向,以1:1随机分为NS-TI组(13眼)和TI-NS组(12眼)。NS-TI组患者接受内界膜撕除方向为鼻上起瓣,向颞下方向撕除ILM;TI-NS组患者接受内界膜撕除方向为颞下起瓣,向鼻上方向撕除ILM 。术前、术后1月、术后3月采集患者自发荧光照相,通过影像学上血管标记点或交叉点的位置计算黄斑视盘距离(FMD)、颞侧血管至视盘距离(T-OD)、鼻侧血管至视盘距离(N-OD)、黄斑区垂直血管距离(VIAD)、黄斑区水平血管距离(HIAD)、黄斑区面积(PMA)。对比两种撕膜方式后术后1月、3月视网膜位移(包括FMD、T-OD、N-OD、VIAD、HIAD、PMA)、裂孔闭合率,术后最佳矫正视力,分析两种撕膜方式的异同。
英文摘要:
      Objective: To compare two different internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling pattern on retinal displacement after closure of idiopathic macular hole (IMH). Methods:This was a prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled study. Twenty-five eyes from 25 patients with idiopathic macular hole were randomly allocated into two groups, NS-to-TI group (13 eyes) and TI-to-NS (12 eyes) group. For patients in NS-to-TI group, ILM was peeled off from nasal-superior retina to temporal-inferior retina. For patients in TI-to-NS group, ILM was peeled off from temporal-inferior retina to nasal-superior retina. Baseline, 1 month, and 3 months after surgery, autofluorescence fundus images were collected for measurement of distance between macular hole or foveal center to margin of optic disc (FMD), temporal vessel to optic disc (T-OD), nasal vessel to optic disc (N-OD), vertical Interarcade distance (VIAD), horizontal Interarcade distance (HIAD), and perimacular area (PMA) based on the retinal vessels with bifurcation or crossing on retina. The retinal displacement, macular hole closure rate, and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were compared between the two groups after surgery. Results: We found no difference between the two group in the values of FMD, T-OD, N-OD, VIAD, HIAD, and PMA before and after surgery. Both group yield 100 % macular hole closure rate. The difference of postoperative BCVA between the two groups was also of no statistical significance. Conclusions: The two different ILM peeling pattern showed similar visual outcome and retinal displacement, which means the surgeons can peel the ILM with different grasp site and different orientation.
View Fulltext   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭