论文部分内容阅读
目的 对玻璃体切割注气和黄斑部加压术治疗有玻璃体牵引的黄斑裂孔视网膜脱离的疗效进行对比分析。方法 有玻璃体牵引皱襞的黄斑裂孔视网膜脱离病例,30眼接受黄斑裂孔冷凝、黄斑部硅胶海绵加压术;65眼接受玻璃体切割注C3F8气体。随访6～24mo,平均9.5mo。结果 治愈率前者为86.67%,后者为90.76%,后者高于前者,虽无显著差异,但术后视力的普遍改善程度则有显著差异(P<0.01)。结论 治疗牵引性黄斑裂孔视网膜脱离,2种术式的黄斑孔封闭及视网膜解剖复位率接近,但玻璃体切割注气术视功能恢复方面显著优于黄斑部加压术,玻璃体切割注气术将取代黄斑部加压术。
Objective To compare the efficacy of vitrectomy gas injection and macular pressurization in the treatment of macular hole retinal detachment with vitreous traction. Methods: Forty patients with macular hole retinal detachment with vitreous traction folds were treated with macular hole condensation and macular silicone sponge in 30 eyes. 65 eyes underwent vitrectomy with C3F8 gas. Follow-up 6 ~ 24mo, an average of 9.5mo. Results The former was 86.67% and the latter 90.76%, the latter was higher than the former. Although there was no significant difference, the general improvement of postoperative visual acuity was significantly different (P <0.01). Conclusion Treatment of retinal detachment with traumatic macular hole, macular hole closure and retinal anatomical reduction rate of the two procedures are similar, but vitreous cut gas insufficiency is significantly better than macular pressurization in vitrectomy, vitrectomy and gas injection will replace Macular pressure surgery.