期刊文献+

飞秒激光与角膜板层刀辅助LASIK术后早期角膜生物力学变化的比较 被引量:8

Comparison of corneal biomechanical changes at early stage after femtosecond LASIK and microkeratome LASIK
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:基于角膜基质床厚度/术前角膜厚度(residual corneal stroma thickness/corneal thickness,RCST/CT)的不同,比较飞秒激光辅助LASIK和角膜板层刀辅助LASIK术后早期角膜生物力学的变化。方法:选取190例379眼,其中飞秒激光辅助LASIK组94例187眼,角膜板层刀辅助LASIK组96例192眼。根据术后剩余RCST/CT的不同,将飞秒激光辅助LASIK组(FS-IK组)和角膜板层刀辅助LASIK组(M-IK组)各分为三组,IK-Ⅰ组(RCST/CT<55%)、IK-Ⅱ组(55%≤RCST/CT<60%)和IK-Ⅲ组(RCST/CT≥60%)。分别于术前、术后1mo和3mo应用眼反应分析仪(reichert ocular response analyzer,ORA)检测角膜滞后量(corneal hysteresis,CH)和角膜阻力因子(corneal resistance factor,CRF)。结果:不同手术方式(FS-IK与M-IK)比较,CH和CRF均无统计学差异(F=0.44,F=2.56,P=0.51,P=0.11)。不同的RCST/CT比较,CH和CRF均有统计学差异(F=103.03,128.48,P均<0.05)。Ⅰ组CH和CRF较Ⅱ组明显减小(P<0.05),Ⅱ组CH和CRF较Ⅲ组明显减小(P<0.05),Ⅰ组CH和CRF较Ⅲ组明显减小(P<0.05)。术前及术后不同时间比较,CH和CRF均有统计学差异(F=576.99,1162.06,P均<0.05)。术后1mo和3mo,CH和CRF均较术前明显减小(P<0.05),术后1mo和术后3mo比较,CH和CRF差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:无论是飞秒激光辅助LASIK还是角膜板层刀辅助LASIK在术后早期角膜生物力学参数均下降,但两种手术方式对角膜生物力学的影响无差异。 AIM: To compare the corneal biomechanical changes at early stage after femtosecond laser assisted in situ keratomi( LASIK) and microkeratome LASIK according to different residual corneal stroma thickness /cornea thickness( RCST/CT).METHODS: Ninety- four patients( 187 eyes) with femtosecond LASIK( FS- IK) and 96 patients( 192 eyes)with microkeratome LASIK( M- IK) were included in this study. LASIK group was divided into three groups according to the ratio of RCST/CT,which were IK- I group( RCST/CT 〈55%),IK-Ⅱ group( 55%≤RCST/CT〈60%) and IK- Ⅲ group( RCST/CT≥60%). Corneal hysteresis( CH) and corneal resistance factor( CRF) were measured by reichert ocular response analyzer( ORA) at pre- operation,postoperative 1and 3mo.RESULTS: Compared with FS- IK and M- IK,there were no statistical difference in CH and CRF( F =0. 44,F =2. 56,P = 0. 51,P = 0. 11). Based on different RCST/CT,there were statistical differences in CH and CRF between group Ⅰ and group Ⅱ( F = 103. 03,128. 48,P〈0. 05),group Ⅱ and group Ⅲ( P〈0. 05),group Ⅰ and group Ⅲ( P〈0. 05). There were statistical differences in CH and CRF between pre- operation and different postoperative times( F = 576. 99,1162. 06,P〈0. 05). CH and CRF of postoperative 1mo and 3mo were significantly smaller than pre- operation( P〈0. 05),but there was no statistical difference between postoperative 1and 3mo( P 0.05).CONCLUSION: The biomechanical parameters decreased at early stage after femtosecond LASIK and microkeratome LASIK,but there is no statistical difference between femtosecond LASIK and microkeratome LASIK.The less the ratio of RCST/CT, the more effect on biomechanics.
出处 《国际眼科杂志》 CAS 2015年第3期428-431,共4页 International Eye Science
基金 黑龙江省哈尔滨市科技创新人才研究专项资金项目(No.2010RFLXS010) 黑龙江省教育厅科学技术专项资金项目(No.12521263) 黑龙江省人事厅留学回国人员科技项目择优资助资金项目(No.2012-134)~~
关键词 飞秒激光 角膜板层刀 准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术 角膜生物力学 femtosecond laser microkeratome LASIK corneal biomechanics
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

二级参考文献88

共引文献78

同被引文献98

  • 1Dawson DG. Biomechanical and wound healing characteristics of corneas after excimer laser keratorefractive surgery: is there a difference between advanced surface ablation and sub-Bowman′s keratomileusis?[J] J Refract Surg, 2008, 24(1): S90-S96.
  • 2Sloan SR Jr, Khalifa YM, Buckley MR. The location- and depth-dependent mechanical response of the human cornea under shear loading[J]. Invest Ophth Vis Sci, 2014, 55(12): 7919-7924.
  • 3Okafor KC, Brandt JD. Measuring intraocular pressure[J]. Curr Opin Ophthalmol, 2015, 26(2): 103-109.
  • 4Carbonaro F, Hysi PG, Fahy SJ, et al. Optic disc planimetry, corneal hysteresis, central corneal thickness, and intraocular pressure as risk factors for glaucoma[J]. Am J Ophthalmol , 2014, 157(2):441-446.
  • 5Madhvi D, Taylor DA, Radcliffe NM. Corneal hysteresis and its relevance to glaucoma[J]. Curr Opin Ophthalmol, 2015, 26(2): 96-102.
  • 6Whitford C, Studer H, Boote C, et al. Biomechanical model of the human cornea: Considering shear stiffness and regional variation of collagen anisotropy and density[J]. J Mech Behav Biomed, 2014, 42: 76-87.
  • 7Mohammadpour M, Etesami I, Yavari Z, et al. Ocular response analyzer parameters in healthy, keratoconus suspect and manifest keratoconus eyes[J]. Oman J Ophthalmol , 2015, 8(2): 102-106.
  • 8Coste V, Schweitzer C, Paya C, et al. [Evaluation of corneal biomechanical properties in glaucoma and control patients by dynamic Scheimpflug corneal imaging technology][J]. J Fr Ophtalmol , 2015, 38(6): 504-513.
  • 9Deol M, Ehrlich J R, Shimmyo M, et al. Association between corneal hysteresis and the magnitude of intraocular pressure decrease after cataract surgery[J]. J Cataract Refr Surg, 2015, 41(6): 1176-1181.
  • 10Elsheikh A, Joda A, Abass A, et al. Assessment of the Ocular Response Analyzer as an Instrument for Measurement of Intraocular Pressure and Corneal Biomechanics[J]. Curr Eye Res, 2014, 40(11): 1-9.

引证文献8

二级引证文献40

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部