跗骨前和隔膜前联合注射肉毒杆菌毒素治疗眼睑痉挛:前瞻性非随机临床试验。

IF 4.1 1区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
JUNHAO HU , QINYING MU , FUHAO MA , HAO WANG , LIYI CHI , MING SHI
{"title":"跗骨前和隔膜前联合注射肉毒杆菌毒素治疗眼睑痉挛:前瞻性非随机临床试验。","authors":"JUNHAO HU ,&nbsp;QINYING MU ,&nbsp;FUHAO MA ,&nbsp;HAO WANG ,&nbsp;LIYI CHI ,&nbsp;MING SHI","doi":"10.1016/j.ajo.2024.10.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To compare the efficacy of two botulinum toxin (BoNT) injection methods, pretarsal (PT) combined with preseptal (PS) injection (PT-PS) and conventional PT injection, in the treatment of benign essential blepharospasm (BEB).</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Prospective nonrandomized clinical trial.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>From January 2023 to April 2024, 95 BoNT injections into orbicularis oculi were performed in 45 BEB patients, including 52 PT-PS injections s and 43 PT injections. Jankovic Rating Scale (JRS) and Blepharospasm Disability Index (BSDI) were used to assess motor symptoms. The efficacy of two injection methods for BEB was compared in terms of latency to response (LTR), latency to the peak response (LPR), duration of peak response (DPR), duration of response (DOR), satisfaction degree, and possible complications.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Both injection methods significantly improved JRS and BSDI scores in patients with BEB. However, PT-PS injections showed a shorter LTR ([4.00 (3.00, 6.00] vs 5.00 [4.00, 7.00] days, <em>P</em> = .024) and LPR (23.50 [16.00, 26.00] vs 26.00 [20.00, 30.00] days, <em>P</em> = .040), a longer DPR (88.00 [80.50, 104.75] vs 75.00 [65.00, 92.00] days, <em>P</em> = .003) and DOR (135.00 [118.50, 153.75] vs 121.00 [107.00, 135.00] days, <em>P</em> = .003) than PT injections. Patients with PT-PS injections were more satisfied than those with PT injections (9.50 [8.50, 10.00] vs 8.00 [7.50, 9.00], <em>P</em> &lt; .001), and around 2/3 of patients were more willing to receive the combined injection method later. Among patients receiving PT-PS injections, only one case experienced ptosis, and there were no significant differences in other complications such as lacrimation, dry eyes, and blurred vision between the two injection methods.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>PT-PS injections of BoNT showed more advantages in the treatment of BEB than PT injections in terms of both their efficacy and patients’ satisfactions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7568,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":"270 ","pages":"Pages 19-24"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Combination of Pretarsal and Preseptal Botulinum Toxin Injections in the Treatment of Blepharospasm: A Prospective Nonrandomized Clinical Trial\",\"authors\":\"JUNHAO HU ,&nbsp;QINYING MU ,&nbsp;FUHAO MA ,&nbsp;HAO WANG ,&nbsp;LIYI CHI ,&nbsp;MING SHI\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ajo.2024.10.007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To compare the efficacy of two botulinum toxin (BoNT) injection methods, pretarsal (PT) combined with preseptal (PS) injection (PT-PS) and conventional PT injection, in the treatment of benign essential blepharospasm (BEB).</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Prospective nonrandomized clinical trial.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>From January 2023 to April 2024, 95 BoNT injections into orbicularis oculi were performed in 45 BEB patients, including 52 PT-PS injections s and 43 PT injections. Jankovic Rating Scale (JRS) and Blepharospasm Disability Index (BSDI) were used to assess motor symptoms. The efficacy of two injection methods for BEB was compared in terms of latency to response (LTR), latency to the peak response (LPR), duration of peak response (DPR), duration of response (DOR), satisfaction degree, and possible complications.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Both injection methods significantly improved JRS and BSDI scores in patients with BEB. However, PT-PS injections showed a shorter LTR ([4.00 (3.00, 6.00] vs 5.00 [4.00, 7.00] days, <em>P</em> = .024) and LPR (23.50 [16.00, 26.00] vs 26.00 [20.00, 30.00] days, <em>P</em> = .040), a longer DPR (88.00 [80.50, 104.75] vs 75.00 [65.00, 92.00] days, <em>P</em> = .003) and DOR (135.00 [118.50, 153.75] vs 121.00 [107.00, 135.00] days, <em>P</em> = .003) than PT injections. Patients with PT-PS injections were more satisfied than those with PT injections (9.50 [8.50, 10.00] vs 8.00 [7.50, 9.00], <em>P</em> &lt; .001), and around 2/3 of patients were more willing to receive the combined injection method later. Among patients receiving PT-PS injections, only one case experienced ptosis, and there were no significant differences in other complications such as lacrimation, dry eyes, and blurred vision between the two injection methods.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>PT-PS injections of BoNT showed more advantages in the treatment of BEB than PT injections in terms of both their efficacy and patients’ satisfactions.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7568,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\"270 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 19-24\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000293942400477X\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"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":"American Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000293942400477X","RegionNum":1,"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

目的比较两种肉毒杆菌毒素(BoNT)注射方法--跗前注射(PT)联合眶前注射(PT-PS)和常规PT注射治疗良性眼睑痉挛(BEB)的疗效。方法2023年1月至2024年4月,对45例BEB患者进行了95次眼轮匝肌BoNT注射,包括52次PT-PS注射和43次PT注射。采用扬科维奇评分量表(JRS)和眼轮匝肌痉挛残疾指数(BSDI)评估运动症状。从反应潜伏期(LTR)、峰值反应潜伏期(LPR)、峰值反应持续时间(DPR)、反应持续时间(DOR)、满意度和可能出现的并发症等方面比较了两种注射方法对 BEB 的疗效。然而,PT-PS 注射的 LTR [4.00(3.00,6.00) vs 5.00(4.00,7.00) 天,P=0.024] 和 LPR [23.50(16.00,26.00) vs 26.00(20.00,30.00) 天,P=0.040],DPR[88.00(80.50,104.75) vs 75.00(65.00,92.00)天,p=0.003]和DOR[135.00(118.50,153.75) vs 121.00(107.00,135.00)天,p=0.003]长于PT注射。接受 PT-PS 注射的患者比接受 PT 注射的患者更满意[9.50(8.50,10.00) vs 8.00(7.50,9.00),P<0.001],约 2/3 的患者更愿意以后接受联合注射方法。在接受PT-PS注射的患者中,仅有1例出现上睑下垂,其他并发症如流泪、眼干、视力模糊等在两种注射方法中无明显差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Combination of Pretarsal and Preseptal Botulinum Toxin Injections in the Treatment of Blepharospasm: A Prospective Nonrandomized Clinical Trial

Purpose

To compare the efficacy of two botulinum toxin (BoNT) injection methods, pretarsal (PT) combined with preseptal (PS) injection (PT-PS) and conventional PT injection, in the treatment of benign essential blepharospasm (BEB).

Design

Prospective nonrandomized clinical trial.

Methods

From January 2023 to April 2024, 95 BoNT injections into orbicularis oculi were performed in 45 BEB patients, including 52 PT-PS injections s and 43 PT injections. Jankovic Rating Scale (JRS) and Blepharospasm Disability Index (BSDI) were used to assess motor symptoms. The efficacy of two injection methods for BEB was compared in terms of latency to response (LTR), latency to the peak response (LPR), duration of peak response (DPR), duration of response (DOR), satisfaction degree, and possible complications.

Results

Both injection methods significantly improved JRS and BSDI scores in patients with BEB. However, PT-PS injections showed a shorter LTR ([4.00 (3.00, 6.00] vs 5.00 [4.00, 7.00] days, P = .024) and LPR (23.50 [16.00, 26.00] vs 26.00 [20.00, 30.00] days, P = .040), a longer DPR (88.00 [80.50, 104.75] vs 75.00 [65.00, 92.00] days, P = .003) and DOR (135.00 [118.50, 153.75] vs 121.00 [107.00, 135.00] days, P = .003) than PT injections. Patients with PT-PS injections were more satisfied than those with PT injections (9.50 [8.50, 10.00] vs 8.00 [7.50, 9.00], P < .001), and around 2/3 of patients were more willing to receive the combined injection method later. Among patients receiving PT-PS injections, only one case experienced ptosis, and there were no significant differences in other complications such as lacrimation, dry eyes, and blurred vision between the two injection methods.

Conclusions

PT-PS injections of BoNT showed more advantages in the treatment of BEB than PT injections in terms of both their efficacy and patients’ satisfactions.
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
9.20
自引率
7.10%
发文量
406
审稿时长
36 days
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Ophthalmology is a peer-reviewed, scientific publication that welcomes the submission of original, previously unpublished manuscripts directed to ophthalmologists and visual science specialists describing clinical investigations, clinical observations, and clinically relevant laboratory investigations. Published monthly since 1884, the full text of the American Journal of Ophthalmology and supplementary material are also presented online at www.AJO.com and on ScienceDirect. The American Journal of Ophthalmology publishes Full-Length Articles, Perspectives, Editorials, Correspondences, Books Reports and Announcements. Brief Reports and Case Reports are no longer published. We recommend submitting Brief Reports and Case Reports to our companion publication, the American Journal of Ophthalmology Case Reports. Manuscripts are accepted with the understanding that they have not been and will not be published elsewhere substantially in any format, and that there are no ethical problems with the content or data collection. Authors may be requested to produce the data upon which the manuscript is based and to answer expeditiously any questions about the manuscript or its authors.
×
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