摘要目的:观察玻璃体腔注射康柏西普（IVC）联合全视网膜激光光凝（PRP）治疗糖尿病视网膜病变（DR）合并Ⅰ、Ⅱ期新生血管性青光眼（NVG）的疗效。方法:临床病例对照研究。2013年10月至2019年3月于廊坊市香河县人民医院眼科检查确诊的DR合并Ⅰ、Ⅱ期NVG患者50例50只眼纳入研究。其中，男性27例27只眼，女性23例23只眼；均为单眼。平均年龄（53.5±7.13）岁。Ⅰ、Ⅱ期NVG分别为11、39只眼。所有患者均行BCVA、眼压、眼底血管造影检查。BCVA检查采用国际标准视力表进行，统计时换算为logMAR视力。应用随机数字表法将患者分为康柏西普＋激光治疗（联合治疗）组、激光治疗组，均为25例25只眼。两组患者年龄（ t=0.058 ）、性别构成比（ χ2=0.081）、logMAR BCVA （ t=0.294 ）、眼压（ t=-0.070）、房角及虹膜新生血管不同级别眼数（ χ2=1.683、0.854）比较，差异均无统计学意义（ P>0.05 ）。对比观察两组间PRP治疗完成后1周，1、3、6、9个月BCVA、眼压、虹膜新生血管及房角新生血管变化。连续变量采用独立样本 t检验。联合治疗组和激光治疗组之间，两组内不同时间点以及两因素的交互作用采用单因素重复方差分析。 结果:联合治疗组、激光治疗组患眼治疗后不同时间房角及虹膜新生血管数量、眼压、logMAR BCVA与治疗前比较，差异均有统计学意义（ F=124.211、65.153、69.249、26.848， P<0.001 ）。治疗后，联合治疗组患眼房角及虹膜新生血管消退以及眼压、logMAR BCVA改善均优于激光治疗组，差异有统计学意义（ F=47.543、25.051、12.265、9.994 ， P=0.001、0.001、0.001、0.003 ）。治疗后不同时间，与激光治疗组比较，联合治疗组患眼虹膜和房角新生血管数量更少，眼压明显下降，BCVA提高，差异均有统计学意义（ P<0.05 ）。 结论:IVC联合PRP治疗DR合并Ⅰ、Ⅱ期NVG疗效优于单纯PRP治疗。

abstractsTo observe the efficacy of intravitreal injection of conbercept (IVC) combined with panretinal laser photocoagulation (PRP) in the treatment of diabetic retinopathy (DR) combined with stage I and II neovascular glaucoma (NVG).Methods:A clinical case-control study. From October 2013 to March 2019, 50 eyes (50 patients) with DR and stage Ⅰ to Ⅱ NVG diagnosed in the Department of Ophthalmology, Peoples's Hospital of Xianghe were were included in the study. There were 27 eyes (27 males) and 23 eyes (23 females); all patients were monocular with the average age of 53.5±7.13 years old. Stage Ⅰ and Ⅱ NVG were 11 and 39 eyes, respectively. All patients underwent BCVA, intraocular pressure, and fundus angiography. The BCVA examination adopted the international standard visual acuity chart, which was converted to logMAR BCVA visual acuity in statistics. The patients were divided into the Conbercept+laser therapy (combination therapy) group and the laser therapy group by random number table, with 25 eyes. The age of the two groups of patients ( t=0.058), gender composition ratio ( χ2=0.081), logMAR BCVA ( t=0.294), intraocular pressure ( t=-0.070), the number of eyes with different grades of angle and iris neovascularization ( χ2=1.683, 0.854) were compared, the difference was not statistically significant ( P>0.05). The changes of BCVA, intraocular pressure, iris neovascularization, and angular neovascularization were compared and observed between the two groups one week after the completion of PRP treatment, 1, 3, 6, and 9 months. Independent sample t test was used for continuous variables. Between the combination treatment group and the laser treatment group, at different time points within the two groups and the interaction of the two factors, a single-factor repeated analysis of variance was used. Results:Compared with the results before treatment, the combined treatment group and laser treatment group had statistically significant differences in the number of angle and iris neovascularization, intraocular pressure and logMAR BCVA at different times after treatment in the combined treatment group and laser treatment group ( F=124.211, 65.153, 69.249, 26.848; P<0.001). After treatment, the combined treatment group was better than the laser treatment group in terms of the regression of eye angle and iris neovascularization, intraocular pressure and logMAR BCVA, and the difference was statistically significant ( F=47.543, 25.051, 12.265, 9.994; P=0.001, 0.001, 0.001, 0.003). At different times after treatment, compared with the laser treatment group, the number of neovascularization in the iris and angle of the eye in the combined treatment group was less, the intraocular pressure was significantly decreased, and the BCVA was increased. The difference was statistically significant ( P<0.05). Conclusion:The efficacy of Kang IVC combined with PRP in the treatment of DR with stage Ⅰ and Ⅱ NVG is better than that of PRP alone.