摘要目的 对比观察尿激酶溶栓治疗面部微注射玻尿酸致眼动脉阻塞、视网膜动脉阻塞(RAO)及自发性RAO的临床效果.方法 回顾性研究.2014年1月至2018年2月在西安市第四医院眼科住院治疗的面部注射玻尿酸致眼动脉阻塞、RAO患者22例22只眼(玻尿酸组)纳入研究.选择自发性RAO 22例22只眼作为对照组.所有患者采用国际标准视力表检测BCVA,并将结果转换为logMAR视力记录;采用FFA测量臂-视网膜循环时间(A-Rct)及视网膜主干-分支末梢充盈时间(FT);同时行颅脑MRI检查.两组患者年龄及FT比较,差异有统计学意义(t=14.840、3.263,P=0.000、0.003);logMAR视力、发病时间和A-Rct比较,差异无统计学意义(t=0.461、0.107、1.101,P=0.647、0.915、0.277).排除溶栓治疗禁忌后,所有患者行尿激酶溶栓治疗.其中玻尿酸组、对照组患者各有6例经滑车上动脉逆行眼动脉溶栓、6例经颈内动脉顺行眼动脉溶栓、10例采用静脉溶栓.治疗后24 h复查FFA,记录A-Rct及FT;治疗后30d复查视力.观察患者治疗中及治疗后不良反应发生情况.对比观察两组患者治疗前后logMAR视力及A-Rct、FT的改变情况,并行t检验.结果 治疗后24 h,玻尿酸组患者A-Rct、FT分别为(21.05±3.42)、(5.05±2.52)s,较治疗前明显缩短,差异有统计学意义(t=4.569、2.730,P=0.000、0.000);对照组患者A-Rct、FT分别为(19.55±4.14)、(2.55±0.91)s,较治疗前明显缩短,差异有统计学意义(t=4.114、7.601,P=0.000、0.000).两组患者治疗后24 h A-Rct比较,差异无统计学意义(t=1.311,P=0.197);FT比较,差异有统计学意义(t=4.382,P=0.000).两组患者治疗后A-Rct、FT较治疗前的缩短时间比较,差异无统计学意义(t=0.330、0.510,P=0.743、0.613).治疗后30d,玻尿酸组、对照组患者logMAR视力分别为0.62±0.32、0.43±0.17,均较治疗前改善,差异有统计学意义(t=2.289、5.169,P=0.029、0.000).两组患者治疗后logMAR视力比较,差异有统计学意义(t=2.872,P=0.008).两组患者治疗前后logMAR视力差值比较,差异有统计学意义(t=2.239,P=0.025).所有患者治疗过程中及治疗后均未发生眼部及全身不良反应.结论 尿激酶溶栓治疗面部微注射玻尿酸致眼动脉阻塞、RAO及自发性RAO安全有效,缩短A-Rct、FT,提高视力;但玻尿酸致眼动脉阻塞、RAO患者治疗后的视力提高程度较自发性RAO差.

abstractsObjective To compare the clinical effects ofurokinase thrombolytic therapy for optic artery occlusion (OAO) and retinal artery occlusion (RAO) caused by facial microinjection with hyaluronic acid and spontaneous RAO.Methods From January 2014 to February 2018,22 eyes of 22 patients with OAO and RAO caused by facial microinjection of hyaluronic acid who received treatment in Xi'an Fourth Hospital were enrolled in this retrospective study (hyaluronic acid group).Twenty-two eyes of 22 patients with spontaneous RAO were selected as the control group.The BCVA examination was performed using the international standard visual acuity chart,which was converted into logMAR visual acuity.FFA was used to measure arm-retinal circulation time (A-Rct) and filling time of retinal artery and its branches (FT).Meanwhile,MRI examination was performed.There were significant differences in age and FT between the two groups (t=14.840,3.263;P=0.000,0.003).The differecens of logMAR visual acuity,onset time and A-Rct were not statistically significant between the two groups (t=0.461,0.107,1.101;P=0.647,0.915,0.277).All patients underwent urokinase thrombolysis after exclusion of thrombolytic therapy.Among the patients in the hyaluronic acid group and control group,there were 6 patients of retrograde ophthalmic thrombolysis via the superior pulchlear artery,6 patients of retrograde ophthalmic thrombolysis via the internal carotid artery,and 10 patients of intravenous thrombolysis.FFA was reviewed 24 h after treatment,and A-Rct and FT were recorded.Visual acuity was reviewed 30 days after treatment.The occurrence of adverse reactions during and after treatment were observed.The changes of logMAR visual acuity,A-Rct and FT before and after treatment were compared between the two groups using ttest.Results At 24 h after treatment,the A-Rct and FT of the hyaluronic acid group were 21.05 ± 3.42 s and 5.05± 2.52 s,which were significantly shorter than before treatment (t=4.569,2.730;P=0.000,0.000);the A-Rct and FT in the control group were 19.55 ± 4.14 s and 2.55± 0.91 s,which were significantly shorter than before treatment (t=4.114,7.601;P=0.000,0.000).There was no significant difference in A-Rct between the two groups at 24 h after treatment (t=l.311,P=0.197).The FT difference was statistically significant between the two groups at 24 h after treatment (t=4.382,P=0.000).There was no significant difference in the shortening time of A-Rct and FT between the two groups (t=0.330,0.510;P=0.743,0.613).At 30 days after treatment,the logMAR visual acuity in the hyaluronic acid group and the control group were 0.62± 0.32 and 0.43± 0.17,which were significantly higher than those before treatment (t=2.289,5.169;P=0.029,0.000).The difference of logMAR visual acuity between the two groups after treatment was statistically significant (t=2.872,P=0.008).The difference in logMAR visual acuity before and after treatment between the two groups was statistically significant (t=2.239,P=0.025).No ocular or systemic adverse reactions occurred during or after treatment in all patients.Conclusions Urokinase thrombolytic therapy for OAO and RAO caused by facial microinjection with hyaluronic acid and spontaneous RAO is safe and effective,with shortening A-Rct,FT and improving visual acuity.However,the improvement of visual acuity after treatment of OAO and RAO caused by facial microinjection with hyaluronie acid is worse than that of spontaneous RAO.