比较自体血清和富血小板血浆在治疗严重干眼症和持续性上皮缺损中的作用。

IF 4.1 3区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
İbrahim Özlük, Bora Yüksel, Tuncay Küsbeci
{"title":"比较自体血清和富血小板血浆在治疗严重干眼症和持续性上皮缺损中的作用。","authors":"İbrahim Özlük, Bora Yüksel, Tuncay Küsbeci","doi":"10.1016/j.clae.2024.102247","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the efficacy of topical autologous serum and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in patients with severe dry eye and persistent epithelial defects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty-seven eyes of 42 patients including 12 Sjogren, 11 meibomian gland dysfunction, 8 post penetrating keratoplasty, 5 acne rosacea, 5 chemical burn and 3 neurotophic keratopathy were analyzed. Best corrected visual acuity, Schirmer, Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), tear break-up time, Oxford staining scores were measured before the treatment and 1 month. One month scores of two groups were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty three eyes received autologous serum and 34 received PRP. There was no statistically significant differences between two groups in ocular surface parameters at baseline. Statistically significant improvements were achieved in both groups in all parameters at 1 month (p < 0.05). Schirmer score improved from 7.9 ± 7.6 to 10.6 ± 8.4 mm in autologous serum (p < 0.001) and from 10.9 ± 9.5 to 13.3 ± 10.1 in PRP (p < 0.001); BUT from 4.3 ± 2.7 to 6.7 ± 3.4 s (p < 0.001) and 4.5 ± 3.0 to 6.0 ± 3.6 (p < 0.001); OSDI from 47.7 ± 14.7 to 25.7 ± 11.0 (p < 0.001) and from 54.1 ± 17.3 to 26.8 ± 11.0 (p < 0.001); Oxford score from 4.0 ± 1.0 to 1.3 ± 1.1 in (p < 0.001) and 3.9 ± 0.9 to 1.6 ± 1.3 (p < 0.001) respectively. Significant visual improvement was achieved with PRP from 0.81 ± 0.73 LogMAR to 0.72 ± 0.63 (p = 0.025), whereas insignificant with serum from 0.60 ± 0.65 to 0.57 ± 0.67 (p = 0.147). Mean epithelial healing time was 6.7 ± 4.7 (2-14) days in serum and 3.6 ± 1.9 (2-7) in PRP (p = 0.195).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both treatments are equally effective in severe dry eye and persistent epithelial defects. Although, visual gain is higher in PRP, autologous serum may be preferable due to low cost.</p>","PeriodicalId":49087,"journal":{"name":"Contact Lens & Anterior Eye","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of autologous serum and platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of severe dry eye and persistent epithelial defects.\",\"authors\":\"İbrahim Özlük, Bora Yüksel, Tuncay Küsbeci\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.clae.2024.102247\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the efficacy of topical autologous serum and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in patients with severe dry eye and persistent epithelial defects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty-seven eyes of 42 patients including 12 Sjogren, 11 meibomian gland dysfunction, 8 post penetrating keratoplasty, 5 acne rosacea, 5 chemical burn and 3 neurotophic keratopathy were analyzed. Best corrected visual acuity, Schirmer, Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), tear break-up time, Oxford staining scores were measured before the treatment and 1 month. One month scores of two groups were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty three eyes received autologous serum and 34 received PRP. There was no statistically significant differences between two groups in ocular surface parameters at baseline. Statistically significant improvements were achieved in both groups in all parameters at 1 month (p < 0.05). Schirmer score improved from 7.9 ± 7.6 to 10.6 ± 8.4 mm in autologous serum (p < 0.001) and from 10.9 ± 9.5 to 13.3 ± 10.1 in PRP (p < 0.001); BUT from 4.3 ± 2.7 to 6.7 ± 3.4 s (p < 0.001) and 4.5 ± 3.0 to 6.0 ± 3.6 (p < 0.001); OSDI from 47.7 ± 14.7 to 25.7 ± 11.0 (p < 0.001) and from 54.1 ± 17.3 to 26.8 ± 11.0 (p < 0.001); Oxford score from 4.0 ± 1.0 to 1.3 ± 1.1 in (p < 0.001) and 3.9 ± 0.9 to 1.6 ± 1.3 (p < 0.001) respectively. Significant visual improvement was achieved with PRP from 0.81 ± 0.73 LogMAR to 0.72 ± 0.63 (p = 0.025), whereas insignificant with serum from 0.60 ± 0.65 to 0.57 ± 0.67 (p = 0.147). Mean epithelial healing time was 6.7 ± 4.7 (2-14) days in serum and 3.6 ± 1.9 (2-7) in PRP (p = 0.195).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both treatments are equally effective in severe dry eye and persistent epithelial defects. Although, visual gain is higher in PRP, autologous serum may be preferable due to low cost.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49087,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contact Lens & Anterior Eye\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contact Lens & Anterior Eye\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2024.102247\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contact Lens & Anterior Eye","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2024.102247","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较局部自体血清和富血小板血浆(PRP)对严重干眼症和持续性上皮缺损患者的疗效:分析了 42 名患者的 67 只眼睛,其中包括 12 名 Sjogren 患者、11 名睑板腺功能障碍患者、8 名穿透性角膜移植术后患者、5 名痤疮红斑痤疮患者、5 名化学烧伤患者和 3 名神经性角膜病变患者。在治疗前和治疗一个月测量了最佳矫正视力、Schirmer、眼表疾病指数(OSDI)、泪液破裂时间、牛津染色评分。比较两组患者一个月后的评分:结果:33 只眼睛接受了自体血清治疗,34 只眼睛接受了 PRP 治疗。两组基线眼表参数差异无统计学意义。1 个月后,两组的所有参数均有统计学意义的改善(P 结论:自体血清和 PRP 治疗对严重干眼症同样有效:两种治疗方法对严重干眼症和持续性上皮缺损同样有效。虽然 PRP 的视力提高率更高,但自体血清因其成本低廉而更受欢迎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of autologous serum and platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of severe dry eye and persistent epithelial defects.

Purpose: To compare the efficacy of topical autologous serum and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in patients with severe dry eye and persistent epithelial defects.

Methods: Sixty-seven eyes of 42 patients including 12 Sjogren, 11 meibomian gland dysfunction, 8 post penetrating keratoplasty, 5 acne rosacea, 5 chemical burn and 3 neurotophic keratopathy were analyzed. Best corrected visual acuity, Schirmer, Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), tear break-up time, Oxford staining scores were measured before the treatment and 1 month. One month scores of two groups were compared.

Results: Thirty three eyes received autologous serum and 34 received PRP. There was no statistically significant differences between two groups in ocular surface parameters at baseline. Statistically significant improvements were achieved in both groups in all parameters at 1 month (p < 0.05). Schirmer score improved from 7.9 ± 7.6 to 10.6 ± 8.4 mm in autologous serum (p < 0.001) and from 10.9 ± 9.5 to 13.3 ± 10.1 in PRP (p < 0.001); BUT from 4.3 ± 2.7 to 6.7 ± 3.4 s (p < 0.001) and 4.5 ± 3.0 to 6.0 ± 3.6 (p < 0.001); OSDI from 47.7 ± 14.7 to 25.7 ± 11.0 (p < 0.001) and from 54.1 ± 17.3 to 26.8 ± 11.0 (p < 0.001); Oxford score from 4.0 ± 1.0 to 1.3 ± 1.1 in (p < 0.001) and 3.9 ± 0.9 to 1.6 ± 1.3 (p < 0.001) respectively. Significant visual improvement was achieved with PRP from 0.81 ± 0.73 LogMAR to 0.72 ± 0.63 (p = 0.025), whereas insignificant with serum from 0.60 ± 0.65 to 0.57 ± 0.67 (p = 0.147). Mean epithelial healing time was 6.7 ± 4.7 (2-14) days in serum and 3.6 ± 1.9 (2-7) in PRP (p = 0.195).

Conclusions: Both treatments are equally effective in severe dry eye and persistent epithelial defects. Although, visual gain is higher in PRP, autologous serum may be preferable due to low cost.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
18.80%
发文量
198
审稿时长
55 days
期刊介绍: Contact Lens & Anterior Eye is a research-based journal covering all aspects of contact lens theory and practice, including original articles on invention and innovations, as well as the regular features of: Case Reports; Literary Reviews; Editorials; Instrumentation and Techniques and Dates of Professional Meetings.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信