摘要
目的评价非穿透小梁手术(NPTS)的术后早期并发症及成本效果。方法回顾性分析147例(215只眼)原发性开角型青光眼患者行滤过性手术后的临床资料,包括早期(住院期间)视力、眼压及并发症发生情况。其中NPTS组104只眼,改良小梁切除术(MT)组111只眼。根据所需治疗的例数(NNT)和手术效果,对预防不良事件的发生进行成本效果分析。结果(1)早期视力波动:术后视力下降两行以上者NPTS组25只眼(24.0%)、MT组26只眼(23.4%),两组间的视力变化差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。(2)早期低眼压:术后第1天眼压≤5mmHg(1mmHg=0.133kPa)者NPTS组39只眼(38.2%),MT组10只眼(9.2%),两组间差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);出院时眼压≤5mmHg者分别为18只眼(27.5%)和19只眼(17.3%),两组间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。(3)前房出血:NPTS组20只眼(19.2%),MT组10只眼(9.0%);各组均有2只眼需行前房冲洗;两组间前房出血发生率的差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。(4)早期浅前房:NPTS组发生Ⅱ°浅前房2只眼,Ⅰ°浅前房5只眼;MT组Ⅱ°浅前房5只眼,Ⅰ°浅前房5只眼;各组均未出现Ⅲ°浅前房者,两组间不同程度浅前房的发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。(5)其他并发症:NPTS组术中小梁穿透1只眼,遂改行小梁切除术;术后瞳孔散大6只眼;急性眼压升高1只眼;内滤口虹膜前粘连1只眼;低眼压性黄斑水肿1只眼。(6)成本效果分析:NPTS组对不良事件的绝对风险降低率(ARR)=3.0%,防止1例不良事件发生需治疗的病例数(NNT)=33.2例,较MT组多花费成本11.6万元;对于严重不良事件,NPTS组的绝对风险降低率=1.8%,NNT=55.5例,较MT组多花费成本19.4万元。结论NPTS可能在减少抗青光眼术后严重不良事件的发生方面具有一定作用,但与MT相比,其在减少并发症方面的成本较高;因此,基层医院眼科医师应重点掌握MT操作技术。
Objective To compare the early postoperative complications of non-penetrating trabecular surgery (NPTS) and modified trabeculectomy (MT) in patients with primary open angle glaucoma, and to analyze the cost-effectiveness of NPTS to prevent adverse events as well.Methods One hundred and forty seven consecutive cases (215 eyes) with primary open angle glaucoma from the glaucoma division, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, were involved. One hundred and four eyes underwent NPTS; while 111 eyes underwent MT. Visual acuity, intraocular pressure and complications occurred while staying in the hospital, were recorded. Number of need to treat (NNT) was used to analyze the cost-effective for NPTS. Results (1)Visual acuity decrease over 2 lines occurred in 25 eyes (24.0%) in NPTS group and 26 eyes (23.4%) in MT group. The difference of visual changes between these two groups was not statistically significant(P>0.05).(2)One day after the operation, hypotension [IOP less or equal to 5 mm Hg (1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa)] occurred in 39 eyes in NPTS group (38.2%), and 10 eyes in MT group (9.2%). The difference was significant (P<0.01). On the day of discharge, the incidence of hypotension was 27.5% in NPTS group and 17.3% in MT group, respectively. The difference was still significant (P<0.05).(3)Hyphema was found in 20 eyes (19.2%) in NPTS group and ten eyes (9.0%) in MT group. In either group, a surgical procedure was needed in two eyes to evacuate the blood.(4)Two eyes of grade Ⅱ° and five eyes of grade Ⅰ° shallow chamber were found in NPTS group. Five eyes of grade Ⅱ° and five eyes of grade I shallow chamber were found in MT group. The difference of incidence of shallow chamber between these two groups was not statistically significant (P>0.05).(5)Other complications: In the NPTS group, trabeculo-descemetic membrane rupture occurred in one eye, pupil dilated to 7 mm observed in six eyes; in the MT group, acute elevated IOP occurred in one eye, peripheral anterior synechia at inner incision occurred in one eye,hypotensive macular edema occurred in one eye.(6)The absolute risk ratio (ARR) of NPTS for adverse event was 3.0%, (NNT=33.2), it costs additional RMB $116,100 for preventing one adverse event. For serious adverse event, ARR=1.8% (NNT=55.5), and it costs additional RMB $194,000 to prevent one serious adverse event. Conclusions Although the NPTS may reduce the incidence of serious adverse event in comparing with MT, the cost of NPTS is very high, therefore, it is not an optimal procedure in China. Ophthalmologists in the general hospital should familiar with the MT procedure to save the medical expenses.
出处
《中华眼科杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2005年第6期505-510,共6页
Chinese Journal of Ophthalmology
