论文部分内容阅读
目的:观察并初步探讨视网膜深浅血流密度比值（DSFR）与视网膜分支静脉阻塞（BRVO）继发黄斑水肿（ME）治疗反应的相关性。方法:回顾性非随机对照临床试验研究。2018年12月至2019年12月于北京医院眼科确诊为单眼BRVO继发ME的48例患者48只眼纳入研究。其中，男性29例29只眼，女性19例19只眼；平均年龄（58.77±10.88）岁。所有患眼均接受玻璃体腔注射雷珠单抗治疗，每一个月1次，连续3个月，其后按需治疗。依据治疗后12个月黄斑中心凹视网膜厚度（CRT）将患眼分为水肿消退组（消退组，CRT≤ 250 μm ）、水肿顽固组（顽固组，CRT> 250 μm ）。采用光相干断层扫描血管成像测量所有受检眼视网膜深层毛细血管层（DCP）、浅层毛细血管层（SCP）血流密度（深浅血流密度），选取3次随访时测量的DCP、SCP血流密度并计算DSFR。DSFR记录方式为糖尿病视网膜病变治疗研究（ETDRS）-grid和九宫格记录法。消退组与顽固组DCP、SCP血流密度及DSFR比较行采用配对n t检验。治疗后3个月，根据受试者工作特征曲线下面积（AUC）评估DSFR在ME治疗反应中的效能。采用单因素及多因素二元logistic回归分析法分析影响ME治疗反应的因素。n 结果:治疗后12个月，48只眼中，水肿消退27只眼，未消退21只眼。消退组、顽固组患眼ETDRS-grid记录法不同区域深浅血流密度（DCP：n t=1.804、1.064、0.660，SCP：n t=0.581、0.641、0.167 ）和DSFR （n t=0.393、-0.553、0.474）比较，差异均无统计学意义（n P>0.05）。消退组、顽固组患眼九宫格记录法最严重无灌注区SCP、DCP血流密度及DSFR分别为（27.10±5.70）％、（28.33±8.95）％、1.35±0.54和（27.54±6.70）％、（29.11±0.42）％、1.01±0.40。消退组、顽固组患眼最严重无灌注区深浅血流密度比较，差异无统计学意义（n t=-0.237、-0.340，n P>0.05）；DSFR比较，差异有统计学意义（n t=2.288，n P= 0.024）。单因素及多因素二元logistic回归分析结果显示，最严重无灌注区DSFR与ME治疗反应相关（比值比＝0.212、0.085，n P=0.027、0.024）。AUC评估DSFR在ME治疗反应中的效能，结果显示，AUC为0.800，n P=0.001，Youden指数1.348，灵敏度67.7%，特异性86.7%。n 结论:DSFR降低多见于BRVO顽固ME者；DSFR与ME治疗反应相关。“,”Objective:To observe the correlation analysis between the deep-superficial flow-density ratio (DSFR) and treatment response of macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).Methods:Forty-eight patients (48 eyes) with macular edema secondary to BRVO from December 2018 to December 2019 in the Department of Ophthalmology of Beijing Hospital were enrolled in this study. There were 29 males (29 eyes) and 19 females (19 eyes), with the mean age of 58.77±10.88 years. All eyes were treated with intravitreal injection of ranibizuma once a month for 3 months, and then treated as needed. According to the central retinal thickness (CRT) 12 months after treatment, the patients were divided into good response group (CRT≤250 μm) and refractory group (CRT> 250 μm). The flow density in the superficial capillary plexus (SCP) and deep capillary plexus (DCP) of all subjects was measured by optical coherence tomography angiography. The flow density of DCP and SCP measured at 3 follow-up times was selected and DSFR was calculated. The DSFR was recorded by the Study for the Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy (ETDRS) -grid and Nine-grid. The flow density of DCP, SCP and DSFR were compared between the two groups by paired n t test. At 3 months post-treatment, the efficacy of DSFR in ME treatment response was evaluated according to area under curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression were used to analyze the factors affecting the response to ME treatment.n Results:At 12 months after treatment, there were 27 eyes in good response group and 21 eyes in refractory group. There was no statistical significance in the flow density of DCP (n t=1.804, 1.064, 0.660) and SCP (n t=0.581, 0.641, 0.167) and DSFR (n t=0.393、-0.553、0.474) in all area of response group and refractory group using ETDRS-GRID recording method (n P>0.05). The SCP, DCP and DSFR of the most severe non-perfusion area were (27.10±5.70) %, (28.33±8.95) %, 1.35±0.54 and (27.54±6.70) %, (29.11±0.42) %, 1.01±0.40 in the response group and refractory group, respectively. There was no significant difference in the flow density of DCP and SCP between the two groups (n t=-0.237,-0.340; n P>0.05). The difference of DSFR between two groups was statistically significant (n t=2.288, n P=0.024). Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analysis showed that DSFR in the most severe non-perfusion area was associated with ME response (odds ratio=0.212, 0.085; n P=0.027, 0.024). The AUC was used to evaluate the efficacy of DSFR in ME treatment response, the results showed that the AUC was 0.800, n P=0.001, Youden index was 1.348, sensitivity was 67.7%, and specificity was 86.7%.n Conclusions:DSFR reduction is more common in BRVO secondary to ME patients. DSFR correlates with ME treatment response.