吳鳴宇,葉 劍,許 多
?
·論著·
內(nèi)界膜剝除聯(lián)合視網(wǎng)膜切開治療復(fù)雜眼創(chuàng)傷視網(wǎng)膜脫離的療效觀察
吳鳴宇,葉劍,許多
目的研究內(nèi)界膜剝除聯(lián)合視網(wǎng)膜切開在治療創(chuàng)傷性視網(wǎng)膜脫離的臨床意義。方法筆者對2012~2014年收治的開放性眼創(chuàng)傷所致視網(wǎng)膜脫離患者49例49眼進(jìn)行前瞻性分析,所有患者增生性玻璃體視網(wǎng)膜病變分級(PVR)均為C3以上。將患者隨機(jī)分為兩組,A組22眼,術(shù)中廣泛剝除內(nèi)界膜聯(lián)合周邊視網(wǎng)膜大范圍切開;B組27眼,行常規(guī)玻切手術(shù)治療,并剪除視網(wǎng)膜牽引。隨訪時(shí)間6個(gè)月~2年,平均7.5個(gè)月,對比觀察兩組術(shù)后視力恢復(fù)情況、再次視網(wǎng)膜脫離發(fā)生率及術(shù)后黃斑前膜發(fā)生率。結(jié)果兩組術(shù)前PVR分級及視力比較均無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P>0.05);患者術(shù)后再次視網(wǎng)膜脫離發(fā)生率:A組術(shù)后發(fā)生2眼(9.1%),B組11眼(40.7%),兩組間卡方值為6.229,P值為0.0125;術(shù)后光學(xué)相干斷層掃描(OCT)檢查A組中再次發(fā)現(xiàn)黃斑前膜1眼(4.5%),B組9眼(33.3%),兩組間卡方檢驗(yàn),卡方值為4.540,P值0.033,均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。結(jié)論A組剝除后極部內(nèi)界膜患者,術(shù)后最佳矯正視力比較與B組差別不大,P值無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異,但發(fā)生復(fù)發(fā)性視網(wǎng)膜脫離及黃斑前膜概率均低于未剝離組,且差別有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
眼創(chuàng)傷; 內(nèi)界膜; 視網(wǎng)膜脫離
嚴(yán)重眼創(chuàng)傷常常伴有眼內(nèi)多個(gè)組織結(jié)構(gòu)的破壞,而術(shù)后視網(wǎng)膜是否能復(fù)位很大程度上決定了傷眼術(shù)后是否能保留。近幾年由于玻璃體手術(shù)及視網(wǎng)膜外科的發(fā)展,對重癥眼球破裂傷的處理臨床上常使用玻璃體切除聯(lián)合鞏膜外扣帶術(shù),以及玻切聯(lián)合松弛性視網(wǎng)膜切開術(shù),使許多面臨眼球萎縮的患者保住了眼球,有的還獲得了部分視力[1]。但是在隨訪期間,仍發(fā)現(xiàn)部分患者出現(xiàn)了復(fù)發(fā)性視網(wǎng)膜脫離,以及黃斑前膜增殖,術(shù)后效果仍然欠佳[2]。筆者在周邊視網(wǎng)膜切開的基礎(chǔ)上,對部分患者進(jìn)行廣泛內(nèi)界膜剝除,取得了一定的療效,現(xiàn)報(bào)告如下。
1一般資料
筆者對2012~2014年收治的49例(49眼)眼創(chuàng)傷所致視網(wǎng)膜脫離患者進(jìn)行前瞻性分析,所有患者增生性玻璃體視網(wǎng)膜病變分級(PVR)均為C3以上,A組C3 8眼,D1 7眼 ,D2 4眼,D3 3眼;B組C3共7眼,D1 11眼 ,D2 6眼,D3 3眼,排除非開放性眼創(chuàng)傷所致視網(wǎng)膜脫離及復(fù)發(fā)性視網(wǎng)膜脫離。一般情況見表1。
表1 患者一般情況
2手術(shù)方法
所有患者均行23G三通道睫狀體扁平部玻璃體切除,仔細(xì)切除玻璃體基底部及裂孔邊緣的增殖膜,小心剝除視網(wǎng)膜前膜、松弛視網(wǎng)膜固定皺褶及玻璃體視網(wǎng)膜增殖牽拉,對于視網(wǎng)膜僵硬及前部PVR不能復(fù)位時(shí),均行視網(wǎng)膜切開、切除術(shù)[3]。A組靚藍(lán)染色后廣泛剝除內(nèi)界膜至視網(wǎng)膜血管弓外,B組僅剝除后極部視網(wǎng)膜前膜,其余操作完全一致。松弛性視網(wǎng)膜切開一般選擇牽引最緊張?zhí)幣c牽引方向垂直的切口,使視網(wǎng)膜貼附為止。視網(wǎng)膜切除是在電凝視網(wǎng)膜后用切割頭切除卷曲僵硬的網(wǎng)膜邊緣或裂孔緣,使視網(wǎng)膜恢復(fù)活動度和柔軟性,以便使視網(wǎng)膜貼附,然后使用過氟化碳液體(LPFC)壓平視網(wǎng)膜,用眼內(nèi)激光沿裂孔和視網(wǎng)膜切開部后緣作4~5排光凝,最后行氣液或油液交換。術(shù)后采用俯臥位或側(cè)臥位4~8周。所有患者術(shù)前最佳矯正視力均<0.01,術(shù)后均使用硅油填充。
3觀察指標(biāo)
術(shù)后3個(gè)月行硅油取出術(shù),術(shù)后隨訪3個(gè)月,對比觀察兩組術(shù)后視力恢復(fù)情況、再次視網(wǎng)膜脫離發(fā)生率及術(shù)后是否發(fā)現(xiàn)黃斑前膜。
4統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)方法
1術(shù)前PVR分級情況對比
兩組術(shù)前PVR分級,Z=0.442,P=0.658,差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
2術(shù)后最佳矯正視力對比
A組視力<0.01 10眼(27.3%),0.01~0.1 10眼(45.5%),>0.1 2眼(27.3%);B組視力<0.01 14眼(40.7%),0.01~0.1 12眼(44.4%),>0.1 3眼(14.8%),兩組視力間比較無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P>0.05)。
3術(shù)后復(fù)發(fā)性視網(wǎng)膜脫離和黃斑前膜對比(表2)
隨訪時(shí)間平均7.5個(gè)月。術(shù)后A組發(fā)生再次視網(wǎng)膜脫離2眼(9.1%),B組11眼(40.7%),兩組間卡方值為6.229,P=0.0125,統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)有明顯差異。術(shù)后OCT檢查:A組中再次發(fā)現(xiàn)黃斑前膜1眼(4.5%),B組9眼(33.3%),χ2=4.540,P=0.033,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
表2 術(shù)后復(fù)發(fā)性視網(wǎng)膜脫離和黃斑前膜對比
眼創(chuàng)傷是主要致盲眼病之一,嚴(yán)重眼創(chuàng)傷對眼球結(jié)構(gòu)及視功能影響很大,常導(dǎo)致視力喪失、眼球萎縮甚至眼球摘除。自1991年Machemer等[4]首先應(yīng)用視網(wǎng)膜切開成功治療1例外傷性視網(wǎng)膜嵌塞后,此項(xiàng)技術(shù)至今已有了很大發(fā)展,適應(yīng)證范圍越來越大,手術(shù)成功率不斷提高,目前視網(wǎng)膜復(fù)位率已在40%~99%,其中20%~70%發(fā)現(xiàn)視功能有所改善[5],較十年前已有明顯提高[6]。眼球破裂傷在開放性眼創(chuàng)傷中較難處置,其傷情復(fù)雜,組織損傷廣泛且嚴(yán)重,脈絡(luò)膜損傷、視網(wǎng)膜嵌塞、玻璃體積血及脫出常見,治療上具有相當(dāng)?shù)碾y度及特殊性。在研究中,筆者在傳統(tǒng)的玻切聯(lián)合視網(wǎng)膜切開的基礎(chǔ)上行廣泛內(nèi)界膜剝除,研究顯示術(shù)后黃斑前膜及復(fù)發(fā)性視網(wǎng)膜脫離的發(fā)生率得到有效控制[7]。
眼球破裂傷自身有許多嚴(yán)重的并發(fā)癥,如脈絡(luò)膜撕裂及出血,睫狀體及脈絡(luò)膜脫離,視網(wǎng)膜廣泛嵌頓及卷曲等,而創(chuàng)傷性視網(wǎng)膜脫離更伴有術(shù)中易出血、術(shù)后易廣泛增殖等特點(diǎn)。在手術(shù)操作中應(yīng)當(dāng)注意以下問題:(1)行視網(wǎng)膜切開之前,應(yīng)先徹底剝除視網(wǎng)膜前膜,再切開周邊網(wǎng)膜,取出或切斷視網(wǎng)膜下膜,消除一切牽引因素;(2)切開周邊視網(wǎng)膜之前應(yīng)先行電凝,避免術(shù)中出血影響操作及術(shù)后出血引起術(shù)后增殖;(3)盡可能保留健康視網(wǎng)膜,術(shù)中仔細(xì)觀察視網(wǎng)膜牽引力的方向及短縮的范圍,確定切開及切除術(shù)的部位,過度的視網(wǎng)膜切除會導(dǎo)致術(shù)后頑固性低眼壓,嚴(yán)重可致眼球萎縮;(4)游離的視網(wǎng)膜色素上皮細(xì)胞應(yīng)徹底吸出,防止術(shù)后細(xì)胞增生,同時(shí)應(yīng)避免損傷視網(wǎng)膜色素上皮。
本研究對A組22眼患者在原有玻切手術(shù)模式基礎(chǔ)上,聯(lián)合行廣泛內(nèi)界膜剝除術(shù),術(shù)后隨訪發(fā)現(xiàn),聯(lián)合手術(shù)可有效降低術(shù)后黃斑前膜及復(fù)發(fā)性視網(wǎng)膜脫離的發(fā)生率。Aras等[8]對20眼PVR為D1的視網(wǎng)膜脫離患者行玻璃體切除聯(lián)合內(nèi)界膜剝離術(shù)后未發(fā)現(xiàn)任何黃斑皺褶,但在未行視網(wǎng)膜內(nèi)界膜剝除術(shù)的網(wǎng)脫患者觀察有27.3%術(shù)后形成黃斑前膜。分析其原因,認(rèn)為內(nèi)界膜在玻璃體-視網(wǎng)膜之間起著非常重要的作用。它由Muller細(xì)胞的基底膜、蛋白聚糖和IV型膠原纖維組成,構(gòu)成了增殖性膜發(fā)展的所謂框架,是星形膠質(zhì)細(xì)胞和肌纖維母細(xì)胞遷移和增殖深入的地方,會導(dǎo)致視網(wǎng)膜前膜的形成。神經(jīng)膠質(zhì)細(xì)胞、小膠質(zhì)細(xì)胞和星形膠質(zhì)細(xì)胞最有可能參與膠原蛋白原生層的形成,可能膠質(zhì)細(xì)胞分泌因子會刺激肌纖維母細(xì)胞的分化和遷移。視網(wǎng)膜內(nèi)界膜的移除或許可能抑制遷移過程和肌纖維母細(xì)胞增殖,但這種機(jī)制并不完全明確。本研究證明了視網(wǎng)膜內(nèi)界膜剝除術(shù)可對明顯纖維化的過程產(chǎn)生抑制作用。
視網(wǎng)膜切開聯(lián)合內(nèi)界膜剝除手術(shù),對于部分PVR極為嚴(yán)重的創(chuàng)傷性視網(wǎng)膜脫離患者仍可以使其視網(wǎng)膜復(fù)位,甚至視力也可能得到改善[9]。正因?yàn)槿绱?,?chuàng)傷所致的視網(wǎng)膜脫離不應(yīng)盲目放棄進(jìn)行視網(wǎng)膜手術(shù),尤其是獨(dú)眼患者。但大面積的視網(wǎng)膜切開,可造成術(shù)后色素上皮的廣泛暴露,術(shù)后低眼壓甚至眼球萎縮等問題,有可能達(dá)不到理想的效果,仍需后續(xù)的臨床工作者不斷努力。通過分析本組以及其他文獻(xiàn),筆者發(fā)現(xiàn)反復(fù)再增殖過程是增殖性玻璃體視網(wǎng)膜病變視網(wǎng)膜脫離手術(shù)過程中的一個(gè)非常嚴(yán)重的問題,再增殖過程的發(fā)展可能與視網(wǎng)膜脫離的嚴(yán)重性有關(guān),而目前的手術(shù)并不可能消除所有的病理組織和刺激因素。但如果在術(shù)中大面積剝除內(nèi)界膜,可以同時(shí)剝除肉眼下不能發(fā)現(xiàn)的視網(wǎng)膜前膜,盡可能消除牽引和增殖環(huán)境。綜上所述,玻切術(shù)中聯(lián)合視網(wǎng)膜內(nèi)界膜大面積剝除術(shù),即使在最嚴(yán)重的視網(wǎng)膜脫離病例中,仍是預(yù)防術(shù)后再次發(fā)生黃斑前膜及再次視網(wǎng)膜脫離的好方法。
[1] 邱新文,周朝暉,李定章.視網(wǎng)膜切開切除術(shù)治療難治性復(fù)雜性視網(wǎng)膜脫離[J].中國實(shí)用眼科雜志,2012,29(11):1162-1166.
[2] Odrobina D,Bednarski M,Cisiecki S,et al.Internal limiting membrane peeling as prophylaxis of macular pucker formation in eyes undergoing retinectomy for severe proliferative vitreoretinopathy[J].Retina,2012,32(2):226-231.
[3] 張黎明,陳輝.部分視網(wǎng)膜切除在復(fù)雜性視網(wǎng)膜脫離術(shù)中的應(yīng)用[J].實(shí)用臨床醫(yī)藥雜志,2004,8(6):63-64.
[4] Machemer R,Aaberg M,Freeman MK,et al.An updated classification of retinal detachment with proliferative vitreoretinopathy[J].Am J Ophthalmol,1991,112(2):159-165.
[5] Alturki WA,Peyman GA,Paris CL,et al.Posterior relaxing retinotomies: analysis of anatomic and visual results[J].Ophthalmic Surg,1992,23(10):685-688.
[6] Tseng JJ,Barile GR,Schiff WM,et al.Influence of relaxing retinotomy on surgical outcomes in proliferative vitreoretinopathy[J].Am J Ophthalmol,2005,140(4):628-636.
[7] 張卯年.慎重開展大范圍視網(wǎng)膜切開和視網(wǎng)膜切除術(shù)[J].中華眼科雜志,2004,40(7):436-438.
[8] Aras C,Arici C,Akar S,et al.Peeling of internal limiting membrane during vitrectomy for complicated retinal detachment prevents epimacular membrane formation[J].Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol,2009,247(5):619-623.
[9] 張喜梅,徐曉莉,高曉虹.內(nèi)界膜剝除術(shù)在復(fù)雜視網(wǎng)膜脫離手術(shù)中的應(yīng)用[J].中華眼外傷職業(yè)眼病雜志,2014,36(9):650-652.
(本文編輯: 秦楠)
Effect of internal limiting membrane peeling and retinotomy in the treatment of traumatic retinal detachment
WUMing-yu,YEJian,XUDuo
(Department of Ophthalmology,Institute of Surgery Research,Daping Hospital,Third Military Medical University,Chongqing400042,China)
ObjectiveTo investigate the clinical value of a combination of internal limiting membrane peeling and retinotomy in the treatment of traumatic retinal detachment. MethodsA prospective analysis was conducted on 49 eyes of 49 patients with retinal detachment caused by open eye injuries admitted in the hospital from 2012 to 2014. These patients were randomly divided into two groups: group A (22 eyes) received intra-operative extensive peeling of internal limiting membrane in combination with a large range of peripheral retinotomy;group B (27 eyes) received conventional vitreous surgical treatment and extermination of retinal traction. During an average follow-up of 6 months to 2 years,postoperative visual recovery,the incidence of recurrent retinal detachment and postoperative incidence of epimacular membrane in the two groups were observed and compared. ResultsPreoperative PVR classification and vision were compared between the two groups,with no statistically significant difference(P>0.05);The incidences of recurrent retinal detachment during follow-up were as follows: postoperative retinal detachment occurred in 2 eyes (9.1%) in group A and 11 eyes (40.7%) in group B;chi-square value between the two groups was 6.229;andPvalue was 0.0125. Postoperative OCT examination showed epimacular membrane in 1 eye (4.5%) for group A and in 9 eyes (33.3%,χ2=4.540,P=0.033) for group B. ConclusionFor patients ith internal limiting membrane peeling at the posterior pole in group A,the best corrected visual acuity after operation was comparable to that in group B,with no statistically significant difference. However,the probabilities of occurrence of recurrent retinal detachment and epimacular membrane in group A were lower than those in group B,with statistically significant differences.
ocular trauma; internal limiting membrane; retinal detachment
1009-4237(2016)07-0400-03
400042 重慶,第三軍醫(yī)大學(xué)大坪醫(yī)院野戰(zhàn)外科研究所眼科
R 779.1
A【DOI】 10.3969/j.issn.1009-4237.2016.07.005
2016-01-22;
2016-03-08)