摘要
目的对比广角激光扫描检眼镜与目前常用眼底检查方法在筛查近视眼眼底相关病变中的区别。方法收集2019年3月至2019年4月在北京同仁医院就诊的52例患者(104只眼)于正常照明瞳孔状态下行广角激光扫描检眼镜眼底图像,并与散瞳后双目间接检眼镜及前置镜眼底检查结果对比。同时,利用调查问卷了解患者对三种检查方法的主观感受。结果经配对χ^2检验统计分析发现,广角激光扫描检眼镜与间接检眼镜、前置镜,及间接检眼镜与前置镜,在后极部视盘旁脉络膜萎缩弧、后巩膜葡萄肿及豹纹状眼底病眼检出数的比较,差异均无统计学意义(χ^2=0.00,0.00,0.00;P>0.05)、(χ^2=0.00,0.00,0.00;P>0.05)、(χ^2=2.25,2.25,0.00;P>0.05);在周边部非压迫样变白、霜样变性及脱色素、Fuchs斑及色素、干性视网膜裂孔及视网膜脱离及视网膜增殖膜或血管膜的病眼检出数的比较,差异均无统计学意义(χ^2=0.00,0.08,0.00;P>0.05)、(χ^2=1.50,3.20,0.00;P>0.05)、(χ^2=0.57,0.00,0.10;P>0.05)、(χ^2=0.50,0.00,0.00;P>0.05)、(χ^2=0.25,0.25,0.50;P>0.05)。间接检眼镜与前置镜对于周边部的视网膜突起及格子样变性的病眼检出数的比较,差异有统计学意义(χ^2=4.17;P<0.05)。而余广角激光扫描检眼镜与间接检眼镜、广角激光扫描检眼镜与前置镜的两两比较,差异均无统计学意义(χ^2=0.00,2.29;P>0.05),且广角激光扫描检眼镜对以上病变病眼检出率达71.15%。广角激光扫描检眼镜与间接检眼镜、广角激光扫描检眼镜与前置镜及间接检眼镜与前置镜对于低度近视、中度近视及高度近视患者的病眼检出数的比较,差异均无统计学意义(χ^2=1.33,0.17,0.00;P>0.05)、(χ^2=0.00,0.00,0.00;P>0.05)、(χ^2=0.25,2.29,0.80;P>0.05)。广角激光扫描检眼镜与间接检眼镜在鼻下象限病变检出总数的比较,差异有统计学意义(Z=-2.67;P<0.05),鼻上、颞上及颞下象限病变检出总数的比较,差异�
Objective This study was aim to compare the wide-field laser ophthalmoscope with present methods in the fundus examination of myopia before refractive surgery. Methods104 eyes of fifty-two patients were included in the study before refractive surgery from March 2019 to April 2019 in Beijing Tongren Hospital. All subjects underwent wide-field laser ophthalmoscope, binocular indirect ophthalmoscope an front mirror. The image of wide-field laser ophthalmoscope was taken with the pupil under natural light, two others were examined with mydriasis. The results of three methods were compared and analyzed at last. Meanwhile, the subjective feelings of patients were investigated through questionnaires. The results were compared by paired chi-square test in wide-field laser ophthalmoscope and indirect ophthalmoscope, wide-field laser ophthalmoscope and front mirror, indirect ophthalmoscope and front mirror. Results No significant statistical differences were observed in the retinopathy of posterior perioptic choroid atrophy arc, posterior scleral staphyloma, and leopard fundus (χ^2=0.00, 0.00, 0.00;P>0.05),(χ^2= 0.00, 0.00, 0.00;P>0.05),(χ^2= 2.25, 2.25, 0.00;P>0.05). There were also no significant differences in peripheral non-compression white, frost degeneration and depigmentation, Fuchs spot and pigment degeneration, dry retinal hole and retinal detachment, retinal proliferative or vascular membrane (χ^2=0.00, 0.08, 0.00;P>0.05);(χ^2= 1.50, 3.20, 0.00;P>0.05);(χ^2= 0.57, 0.00, 0.10;P>0.05);(χ^2= 0.50, 0.00, 0.00;P>0.05);(χ^2= 0.25, 0.25, 0.50;P>0.05). There were statistically differences in peripheral retinopathy of retinal protuberance and lattice degeneration between indirect ophthalmoscope and front mirror(χ^2=4.17, P<0.05), and no statistically significant differences were observed in the comparison of wide-field laser ophthalmoscope with indirect ophthalmoscope and front mirror(χ^2=0.00, 2.29;P>0.05). And the detection rate of wide-field laser ophthalmoscope for the mentioned above lesions was 71.15%. Fo
作者
付彩云
王刚
郑燕
张晶
黄厚斌
张丽
王玥
张秋露
翟长斌
Fu Caiyun;Wang Gang;Zheng Yan;Zhang Jing;Huang Houbin;Zhang Li;Wang Yue;Zhang Qiulu;Zhai Changbin(Beijing Tongren Eye Cener, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences Key Lab., Beijing 100730, China;Department of Ophthalmology, Hainan Hospital of People′s Liberation Army of China General Hospital, Sanya 572013, China)
出处
《中华眼科医学杂志（电子版）》
2019年第4期233-239,共7页
Chinese Journal of Ophthalmologic Medicine(Electronic Edition)
基金
北京市医院管理局临床技术创新项目(XMLX201614)
首都临床特色应用研究基金项目(Z161100000516115)
