高龄白内障患者两种小切口手术疗效分析

Curative effect analysis of two kinds of small incision surgery treating senile cataract patients

目的：研究探讨高龄白内障患者两种小切口手术疗效。方法：本研究选取高龄白内障患者71例123眼作为研究对象，年龄76～96岁。将123眼随机分为小切口囊外白内障摘出术组（A组，55眼）和超声乳化组（B组，68眼）再分别接受人工晶状体植入。结果：两组患者术后视力比较无显著差异（P〉．05）。两组分别有42眼和54眼出现角膜水肿。两组之间发生I级、Ⅱ级及Ⅲ级角膜水肿的眼数无显著差异（χ2=0．81，P〉0．05）；但A组发生Ⅲ级的比例少于B组。A组患者角膜水肿术后消退时间快于B组，其中术后1d消退的眼数A组多于B组（χ2=6．45，P〈0．05）。术后两组内皮细胞计数分别是（2341±238）个／mm2和（2181±282）个／mm2，两组间无显著差异（P〉O．05）。A组并发症发生率比较低。结论：小切口囊外白内障摘出术治疗高龄白内障，是一种比较安全、有效的方式，其疗效与超声乳化手术相近，且费用较低，更适于基层医院推广应用。

AIM： To research the curative effect analysis of two kinds of small incision surgery treating senile cataract patients. METHODS： Totally 71 senile cataract patients （123 eyes）, aged from 76 years to 96 years, were selected as the research objects. All 55 eyes were all treated with small incision non- phacoemulsification （ group A）, and 68 eyes were treated with phacoemulsification （group B）, and then both received intraocular lens implantation. RESULTS： The postoperative visual acuity of the patients between the two groups was no significant difference （P〉0.05）. There were 42 eyes in group A and 54 eyes in group B which suffered from corneal edema. There was no significant difference in the number of corneal edema of grade Ⅰ, grade Ⅱ and grade Ⅲ between the two groups （ Chi- square = 0.81, P〉 0.81 ）. The ratio of corneal edema of grade Ⅲ in group A was less than that in group B. The corneal edema after surgery in patients of group A was with faster fading time than that in group B, and the eyes of corneal edema in group A fading at ld postoperatively were more than that in group B （ Chi-square = 6.45, P〈0.05）. Endothelial cell counts in group A and group 8 were （2341 ＋ 238）/mm2 and （2181 ＋282）/mm2, respectively, and there was no significant difference between the two groups （P〉0.05）. Group A was with a low complication rate. CONCLUSION： Small incision non-phacoemulsification treating senile cataract patients can get a good result for postoperative visual acuity recovery and correction, and it is safe and effective. It receives the similar curative effect with phacoemulsification, but takes less expense. It is worthy of clinical and wide application.