研究目的
To compare the efficacy between fixed and variable treatment regimens of subthreshold yellow micropulse laser for the treatment of diabetic macular edema.
研究成果
Both treatment regimens are effective for the treatment of mild center-involving diabetic macular edema: fixed treatment appears more suitable minimizing treatment time and reducing the possible errors due to wrong titration in the switch from continuous to micropulse mode.
研究不足
The major limitations of this study are the relatively small sample size, the lack of macular visual function examinations such as contrast sensitivity, microperimetry, and the strict inclusion criteria (mild DME at baseline). Moreover, OCT examination was performed using different OCT devices.
1:Experimental Design and Method Selection:
A retrospective, comparative, 12-month study comparing fixed and variable treatment regimens of subthreshold yellow micropulse laser for diabetic macular edema.
2:Sample Selection and Data Sources:
39 eyes (24 eyes received fixed treatment regimen and 15 eyes underwent variable treatment regimen) with diabetic macular edema.
3:List of Experimental Equipment and Materials:
Subthreshold micropulse laser with 577-nm yellow laser (Iridex IQ 577; Laser System Iridex Corp, CA), Mainster Focal/Grid lens (Ocular Instruments, Bellevue, WA).
4:Experimental Procedures and Operational Workflow:
Laser treatment was performed after pupil dilation and topical anesthesia, with parameters set to 100 μm spot size on slit lamp, 5% duty cycle of
5:2 s, and 250 mW power for fixed treatment. For variable treatment, power was titrated to a barely visible burn and then switched to MicroPulse mode, multiplying the test burn power by Data Analysis Methods:
Statistical analysis using SPSS16.0, with variables presented as mean ± standard deviation. A linear mixed model was used for between-group comparisons.
独家科研数据包,助您复现前沿成果,加速创新突破
获取完整内容