机构地区:[1]潍坊医学院,261000 [2]潍坊眼科医院晶状体病区,261000
出 处:《中华眼科医学杂志(电子版)》2020年第1期33-38,共6页Chinese Journal of Ophthalmologic Medicine(Electronic Edition)
基 金:山东省自然科学基金(ZR2013HM108)。
摘 要:目的 探讨超声乳化白内障吸除联合肝素修饰人工晶状体植入术后炎症反应的情况.方法 收集2019年6月至2019年10月就诊于潍坊眼科医院晶状体病区诊断为年龄相关性白内障的患者62例(82 只眼)进行研究.其中,男性27 例(33 只眼),女性35 例(49 只眼).年龄40~85 岁,平均年龄(65.6±10.0)岁.根据术中植入的人工晶状体类型,将纳入研究的患者分为AQBH组、iSert组及LUCIA组等3组.三组患者均行超声乳化白内障吸除联合人工晶状体植入术,术中植入相应组名类型的人工晶状体.术后,分别于术后1d、3d、1周、1个月及3个月对患者进行随访,检测并记录前房闪辉检测结果 ,以均数±标准差描述.三组患者术后各时间点前房闪辉检测结果 的比较采用两因素重复测量方差分析,当差异有统计学意义时,进一步采用SNK法进行两两比较.结果 术后 1 d,AQBH 组、iSert 组及 LUCIA 组患者术眼前房闪辉检测结果 分别为(10.79±0.97)p/ms、(15.37±1.00)p/ms及(10.07±0.98)p/ms.经t检验,LUCIA组与iSert组、AQBH组与iSert组的差异有统计学意义(t=-3.78,-3.29;P<0.05),其余比较差异无统计学意义(t=-3.29,P>0.05).术后3 d,AQBH 组、iSert 组及 LUCIA 组患者术眼前房闪辉检测结果 分别为(14.24±0.97)p/ms、(14.42±1.00)p/ms及(9.34±0.98)p/ms.经t检验,LUCIA组与AQBH及iSert组比较差异有统计学意义(t=-3.54,-3.63;P<0.05),其余比较差异无统计学意义(t=-0.13,P>0.05).术后1 周,AQBH 组、iSert 组及 LUCIA 组患者术眼前房闪辉检测结果 分别为(9.20±0.97)p/ms、(10.14±1.00)p/ms及(7.29±0.98)p/ms.经t检验,LUCIA组与iSert组的差异有统计学意义(t=-2.03,P<0.05),其余比较差异无统计学意义(t=-1.38,-0.68;P>0.05).术后1 个月,AQBH组、iSert组及LUCIA组患者术眼前房闪辉检测结果 分别为(9.19±0.97)p/ms、(13.17±1.00)p/ms及(7.70±0.98)p/ms.经t检验,LUCIA组与iSert组、AQBH组与iSert组比较差异有统计学意义(t=-3.90,-2.86;P<0.05),其余Objective The aim of this study was to observe the inflammatory reactionafter phacoemulsifcation combined with implantation of heparin surface-modified intraocular lenp.Methods From June 2019 to October 2019,62 cases(82 eyes)of age-related cataract with phacoenulsifrcation and intraocular lens implantation were studied in the Department of ophthalmology,Wei Fang Eye Hospital.Among of them.there were 27 males(33 eyes).35 females(49 eyes).aged 40 to 85 years-old with an average ageof(65.6±10.0)years-old.According to the intraocular lens lype.the patients included in the study were divided into three groups:AQBH group,iSert group and LUCIA group.All patients of three groups received intraoperative implantation of correspondingintraocular lens(IOL)in the capsule bag.After one day.three days,one week,one month and three months operation,the subjects were follwed up to record anterior chamber flare, respectively. Three groups were compared by two factors repeatedmeasurement variance analysis at different time points. When the dfference was statistically significant, SNK method was further used for comparison. ResultsOne day after operation, the anterior chamber flare of theAQBH group, iSertgroup, LUCIA group were (10. 79±0.97) p/ms. (15.37±1.00) p/ms and (10.07±0.98)p/ ms. respectively. There was significant difference between the LUCIA group andthe iSert group andbetween the AQBH group and the iSert group(t=-3.78,-3.29;P<0. 05). There was no significantdifference among other groups (t=-3.29,P>0.05). Three days after operation, the anterior chanberflare of the AQBH group. iSertgroup, LUCIAgroup were (14.24±0.97) p/ms, (10.14±1.00) p/ms and(7.29±O.98) p/ms. respectively. There was significant difference between the LUCIA group and the iSertgroup (t=-2.03, P<0.05)。There was no significant difference among other groups(t=-1.38.-0.68. P>0.05) . One month after operation, the anterior chamber flare of the AQBH group, iSert groupand LUCIA group were (9. 19±0. 97) p/ms, (13. 17±1.00) p/ms and (7. 70±0. 98) p/ms,re
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...