两种泪道激光联合术式治疗泪道阻塞的疗效对比

Clinical observation of two kinds of lacrimal laser operations for dacryagogatresia

摘要:

目的：比较泪道激光联合丝裂霉素C及引线型硅胶管植入术和泪道激光单纯联合引线型硅胶管植入术治疗泪道阻塞的临床效果。

方法：用Nd：YAG激光疏通泪道后，A组143例150眼，泪道激光联合丝裂霉素C及引线型硅胶管置入。B组143例150眼，泪道激光疏通后单纯联合引线型硅胶管置入。

结果：A组：治愈138眼，治愈率92.0%，好转10眼，好转率6.7%，总有效率98.7%，无效2眼。B组：治愈107眼，治愈率71.3%，好转32眼，好转率21.3%，总有效率92.7%，无效11眼。统计学分析两组治愈率之间比较χ²=4.15，P<0.05； 总有效率之间比较χ²=5.00，P <0.05，两组之间差异均有统计学意义。

结论：泪道激光联合丝裂霉素C及引线型硅胶管植入治疗泪道阻塞效果更佳，值得推广。

Abstract:

AIM: To compare the effect of two surgical methods: lacrimal laser combined with mitomycin-C and lead-type silicone tube implantation and lacrimal laser combined with lead-type silicone tube implantation only, for dacryagogatresia treatment.

METHODS: After dacryagogatresia was opened by Nd:YAG laser, 143 cases(150 eyes)in group A underwent lacrimal laser combined with mitomycin-C and lead-type silicone tube implantation. One hundred and forty-three cases(150 eyes)of group B was treated with lacrimal laser combined with lead-type silicone tube implantation only.

RESULTS: In group A, 138 eyes(92.0%)was cured, 10(6.7%)was improved, and the total efficiency was 98.7%, 2 was failed. In group B, 107 eyes(71.3%)was cured, 32(21.3%)was improved, and the total efficiency was 92.7%, 11 was failed. Differences of cure rate(χ²=4.15, P<0.05)and total efficiency(χ²=5.00, P<0.05)between two groups had statistical significance.

CONCLUSION:lacrimal Laser combined with mitomycin-C and lead-type silicone tube implantation is more effective compared with the method of lacrimal laser combined with lead-type silicone tube implantation only.