本文選題：玻璃體切割術(shù)　切入點(diǎn)：眼內(nèi)壓　出處：《中南大學(xué)》2010年碩士論文

【摘要】： 目的：本研究目的是應(yīng)用回彈式眼壓計(jì)(rebound tonometer,RBT)與壓平式眼壓計(jì)(goldmann applannation tonometer,GAT)非接觸眼壓計(jì)(non contact tonometer, NCT)測(cè)量玻璃體切割術(shù)后患者術(shù)眼眼壓,觀察RBT眼壓計(jì)測(cè)量的可靠性,準(zhǔn)確性。 方法：選取2009年6月-2009年12月于我院行經(jīng)睫狀體扁平部玻璃體切割術(shù)的患者52例(52只眼),年齡7-83歲(平均50.7±19.27歲),分成二組(術(shù)后氣體／全氟丙烷填充眼,n=35；術(shù)后液體／硅油填充眼,n=17),分別比較術(shù)后3天RBT眼壓計(jì)與GAT眼壓計(jì),NCT眼壓計(jì)測(cè)量值的差異。三種眼壓計(jì)測(cè)量順序隨機(jī),且每種眼壓計(jì)的測(cè)量均間隔5分鐘。所有患者均重復(fù)測(cè)量三次并取其平均值。采用完全隨機(jī)方差分析統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù).直線回歸考察任意兩種眼壓計(jì)的相關(guān)性,Bland-Altmann考察任意兩種眼壓計(jì)的一致性。統(tǒng)計(jì)工作由SPSS軟件完成。 結(jié)果：玻璃體切割術(shù)后氣體／全氟丙烷(C3F8)填充組即Group1組：GAT眼計(jì)測(cè)量值17.83±5.95mmHg,NCT眼壓計(jì)測(cè)量值為19.35±5.71 mmHg,RBT眼壓計(jì)測(cè)量值19.10±7.92 mmHg。RBT測(cè)量值有65.7%與GAT的差值在±3mmHg之內(nèi),與NCT有40.0%。RBT眼計(jì)與后兩種眼壓計(jì)呈高度相關(guān)性(RBT與GAT R2=0.62,P0.001,RBT與NCT R2=0.16,P0.05)。而玻璃體切割術(shù)后液體／硅油填充眼(SOL)填充組即Group2組：三種眼壓計(jì)測(cè)量的總體均數(shù)值,GAT眼壓計(jì)測(cè)量值15.35±5.34mmHg,NCT眼壓計(jì)測(cè)量值為17.45±5.88 mmHg,RBT眼壓計(jì)測(cè)量值16.56±6.36 mmHg。RBT測(cè)量值有70.6%與GAT的差值在±3mmHg之內(nèi),與NCT有70.6%。RBT眼壓計(jì)與后兩種眼壓計(jì)呈高度相關(guān)性(RBT與GATR2=0.60,P0.001,RBT與NCT R2=0.51,P0.001)。Bland-Altmann分析得出：Group1組呈現(xiàn)RBT與GAT, NCT眼壓計(jì)測(cè)量值的變化出現(xiàn)低眼壓低估,高眼壓高估趨勢(shì)。Group2組沒(méi)有出現(xiàn)RBT與NCT眼壓測(cè)量值的變化出現(xiàn)高估或低估趨勢(shì)。 結(jié)論：RBT及GAT、NCT的眼壓測(cè)量值均可以反應(yīng)玻璃體切割術(shù)后患者眼內(nèi)壓的水平。RBT較GAT/NCT眼壓計(jì)由于一致性范圍較大,因此玻璃體切割術(shù)后患者使用RBT眼壓計(jì)測(cè)量眼壓并不能替代GAT/NCT眼壓計(jì)的測(cè)量。
[Abstract]:Objective: the purpose of this study was to measure the intraocular pressure of patients after vitrectomy by using the rebound intraocular barometer (IOP) and the non-contact contact tonometer (NCTT), and to observe the reliability and accuracy of the RBT IOP measurement. Methods: from June 2009 to December 2009, 52 patients (aged 7-83 years, mean 50.7 鹵19.27 years) undergoing transciliary flat vitrectomy in our hospital were divided into two groups (gas / perfluoropropane filled eye 35; Liquid / silicone oil was used to fill the eye, and the difference between RBT and GAT IOP was compared 3 days after operation. The order of measurement of three kinds of IOP was random. All patients were measured three times repeatedly and their average values were taken. The statistical data of complete random variance analysis were used. The linear regression analysis was used to investigate the correlation between any two kinds of IOP and Bland-Altmann test. The statistical work is done by SPSS software. Results: after vitrectomy, the gas / perfluoropropane C _ 3F _ (8) filled group (Group1 group) was 17.83 鹵5.95mm HGAT, and the measured value was 19.35 鹵5.71mm mmHg.RBT. The difference between the measured value of GAT and that of gas / perfluoropropane C _ 3F8 (65.7%) was within 鹵3mmHg. There was a high correlation between 40.0%.RBT ophthalmometer and the latter two kinds of intraocular pressure gauges with NCT. RBT and GAT R2O0.62P0.001RBT and NCT R2O0.16P0.05. The group filled with liquid / silicone oil filled with SOL after vitrectomy was the Group2 group: the total mean value of three kinds of IOP gauges was gat IOP. The measured value of 15.35 鹵5.34mm HgGT IOT was 17.45 鹵5.88mm Hgt, and the difference between GAT and GAT was 70.6% (16.56 鹵6.36 mmHg.RBT), and the difference was within 鹵3mmHg (P < 0.05). There was a high correlation between 70.6%.RBT IOP and the latter two kinds of IOP. RBT and GATR2P 0.001RBT and NCT R2O0.51 P0.001N. Bland-Altmann analysis showed that RBT and GATT were present in group 1, and the change of IOP measured by NCT was low intraocular pressure (IOP). High IOP overestimation. Group 2 showed no tendency to overestimate or underestimate RBT and NCT IOP measurements. Conclusion both the intraocular pressure measurements of% RBT and GATT NCT can reflect the intraocular pressure level of the patients after vitrectomy. RBT is more consistent than the GAT/NCT IOP. Therefore, RBT IOP measurement is not a substitute for GAT/NCT IOP measurement after vitrectomy.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：R779.6

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 孫揮宇,彭曉燕,唐忻;Tono-pen眼壓計(jì)與Goldmann眼壓計(jì)對(duì)玻璃體切割術(shù)后患者眼壓測(cè)量的比較[J];中華眼底病雜志;2005年05期

2 段宣初,吳勤,蔣幼芹,卿國(guó)平,江冰,石晶明;中央角膜厚度對(duì)壓平眼壓計(jì)測(cè)量值的影響[J];中國(guó)實(shí)用眼科雜志;2004年10期

，

本文編號(hào)：1697457