目的 比较白内障超声乳化吸出联合Toric人工晶状体植入术前,OPD-ScanⅢ标记法与裂隙灯水平窄光带标记法的准确性和实用性.方法 前瞻性研究.入选角膜规则散光的白内障患者70例(70眼),散光度数1.00～3.00D,所有患者均行白内障超声乳化联合Toric人工晶状体植入术,按术前角膜散光标记法随机分为两组,观察组(35眼)使用OPD-ScanⅢ标记法,对照组(35眼)使用裂隙灯水平窄光带标记法.观察术后视力恢复、残余散光和人工晶状体轴位偏差等,并对人工晶状体轴位偏差进行组间比较.结果 术后3个月裸眼视力(0.11±0.09)与术前(0.59±0.25)差异有统计学意义(P=0.000);术后3个月人工晶状体轴位偏差与术后1d差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);术前散光(1.88±0.49)D与术后3个月(0.54±0.30)D差异有统计学意义(P=0.000).术后1d、术后3个月两组间人工晶状体轴位偏差差异均无统计学意义(均为P＞0.05).结论 OPD-ScanⅢ标记法与裂隙灯水平窄光带标记法均有很高的准确性和实用性,前者对操作者的要求更低且更容易被患者接受.%Objectivc To compare the accuracy and practicability of OPD-Scan Ⅲ marker methods and slit light narrow band marker methods in phacoemulsification and Toric IOL implantation.Methods A prospective randomized controlled study was conducted in 70 eyes of 70 patients with regular astigmatism (1.00-3.00 D).All patients underwent phacoemulsification and Toric IOL implantation and were randomly divided into two groups according to preoperative marker methods:observant group,in which OPD-Scan Ⅲ marker methods were used in 35 eyes of 35 patients,and control group,with application of slit light narrow band marker methods in 35 eyes of 35 patients.The postoperative visual acuity,residual astigmatism and deviation of lens axis (LAD) were observed and compared between the two groups.Results The uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) between preoperative data and 3 months after surgery was statistically significant [(0.11 ± 0.09) vs.(0.59 ± 0.25)] (P =0.000).The difference in the postoperative 1 day and 3 months LAD was no statistically significant (P ＞ 0.05).The astigmatism between preoperation and 3 months after treatment was significant [(1.88 ± 0.49) D vs.(0.54 ± 0.30) D] (P =0.000).There was no significant difference in LAD between the two groups neither the first day nor 3 months after operation (both P =0.621).Conclusion OPD-Scan Ⅲ marker methods and slit light narrow band marker methods are both highly accurate and practical,but the former requires less for operator and is more easily accepted by patients.
展开▼
