Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦¼ú°ú ¹é³»À庴ÇÕ¼ö¼ú Áß À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦±â·Î ½ÃÇàÇÑ ¼öÁ¤Ã¼Èij¶ÀýÁ¦¼ú Pars Plana Posterior Capsulectomy during Phacovitrectomy

´ëÇѾȰúÇÐȸÁö 2019³â 60±Ç 2È£ p.152 ~ 159
À̼öÁø, ±èÀ¯Ã¶,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
À̼öÁø ( Lee Soo-Jin ) 
°è¸í´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ¾È°úÇб³½Ç

±èÀ¯Ã¶ ( Kim Yu-Cheol ) 
°è¸í´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ¾È°úÇб³½Ç

Abstract

¸ñÀû: À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦¼ú°ú ¹é³»À庴ÇÕ¼ö¼ú Áß À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦±â·Î ½ÃÇàÇÑ ¼öÁ¤Ã¼Èij¶ÀýÁ¦¼úÀÇ ¾ÈÁ¤¼º°ú È¿°ú, ±¼Àý·Â º¯È­¸¦ ¾Ë¾Æº¸°íÀÚ ÇÏ¿´´Ù.

´ë»ó°ú ¹æ¹ý: À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦¼ú°ú ¹é³»À庴ÇÕ¼ö¼úÀ» ½ÃÇà¹ÞÀº ȯÀÚ 76¾ÈÀ» ´ë»óÀ¸·Î ¼ú Áß Èij¶ÀýÁ¦¼úÀ» ½ÃÇàÇÑ A±º°ú ½ÃÇàÇÏÁö ¾ÊÀº B±ºÀ¸·Î ³ª´©¾î µÎ ±ºÀÇ ¼ú ÈÄ ½Ã·Â, ¸ñÇ¥ ±¼Àý·Â°ú ¼ú ÈÄ ½ÇÁ¦ ±¼Àý·Â, ¼ú ÈÄ ÇÕº´Áõ, Èij¶È¥Å¹ µîÀÇ °á°ú¸¦ ÈÄÇâÀûÀ¸·Î Á¶»çÇÏ¿´´Ù.

°á°ú: A±º(37¾È)°ú B±º(39¾È)ÀÇ ³ªÀÌ, ¼ºº°, ¼ú Àü ¹× ¼ú ÈÄ ½Ã·ÂÀÇ Åë°èÇÐÀû Â÷ÀÌ´Â ¾ø¾úÀ¸¸ç ¼ú Áß ÇÕº´ÁõÀº ¾ø¾ú´Ù. ¼ú ÈÄ 2°³¿ù° A±ºÀÇ ½ÇÁ¦ ±¼Àý·ÂÀº -0.44 ¡¾ 0.88D·Î ¸ñÇ¥ ±¼Àý·Â(-0.56 ¡¾ 0.40D)°ú ºñ±³ÇÏ¿© °æÇÑ ¿ø½Ã ÀÌÇàÀ» º¸¿´°í B±ºÀÇ ½ÇÁ¦ ±¼Àý·ÂÀº -0.70 ¡¾ 0.72D·Î ¸ñÇ¥ ±¼Àý·Â(-0.60 ¡¾ 0.81D)°ú ºñ±³ÇÏ¿© °æÇÑ ±Ù½Ã ÀÌÇàÀ» º¸¿´´Ù. µÎ ±º °£ÀÇ ¸ñÇ¥ ±¼Àý·Â°ú ½ÇÁ¦ ±¼Àý·Â°ªÀÇ Â÷ÀÌ´Â Åë°èÇÐÀû À¯ÀǼöÁØ¿¡ ¸Å¿ì ±Ù»çÇÏ¿´´Ù(p=0.050). ¼ú ÈÄ A±º¿¡¼­´Â Èij¶È¥Å¹À̳ª ¼¶À¯Á¶Á÷ÀÇ Áõ½ÄÀº ¾ø¾úÀ¸³ª B±ºÀÇ 10¾È¿¡¼­ Áߵ ÀÌ»óÀÇ Èij¶È¥Å¹ÀÌ ¹ß»ýÇÏ¿© 6¾ÈÀº ¾ß±×·¹ÀÌÀúÈij¶Àý°³¼úÀ» ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç ¼ö¼úÀϷκÎÅÍ Æò±Õ 9.83 ¡¾ 5.2°³¿ù ÈÄ¿´´Ù. µÎ ±º ¸ðµÎ¿¡¼­ Àΰø¼öÁ¤Ã¼ ¾ÆÅ»±¸ ¹× Áß½ÉÀÌÅ»ÀÇ ÇÕº´ÁõÀº ¾ø¾ú´Ù.

°á·Ð: À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦¼ú°ú ¹é³»À庴ÇÕ¼ö¼ú¿¡¼­ À¯¸®Ã¼ÀýÁ¦±â·Î ½ÃÇàÇÑ ¼öÁ¤Ã¼Èij¶ÀýÁ¦¼úÀº ¾à°£ÀÇ ¿ø½Ã ÀÌÇàÀ» ³ªÅ¸³»´Â °æÇâÀ» º¸¿´°í ¼ú ÈÄ Èij¶È¥Å¹À» ¿¹¹æÇÏ´Â ¾ÈÀüÇÏ°í È¿°úÀûÀÎ ¹æ¹ýÀÌ´Ù.

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pars plana posterior capsulectomy (PPPC) during phacovitrectomy.

Methods: In this retrospective study, 76 patients (76 eyes) who underwent phacovitrectomy were enrolled. The patients were divided into two groups according to whether PPPC was performed during phacovitrectomy. In group A, PPPC using a vitreous cutter was combined with phacovitrectomy; in group B, only phacovitrectomy was performed. The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), predicted and actual refractive errors, adverse events, and posterior capsular opacity (PCO) were analyzed and compared between the two groups.

Results: Age, sex, and pre- and postoperative BCVA were not significantly different between group A (n = 37) and group B (n = 39). No intraoperative complications were identified in either group. In group A, the actual refraction (postoperative 2 months) was -0.44 ¡¾ 0.88 diopters (D) and a mild hyperopic shift was found compared to the preoperative predicted refraction (-0.56 ¡¾ 0.40 D). In group B, the actual refraction was -0.70 ¡¾ 0.72 D and a mild myopic shift was found compared to the preoperative predicted refraction (-0.60 ¡¾ 0.81 D). The difference in refraction shifts between the two groups was not significant but very close to it (p = 0.050). In group A, yttrium-aluminum-garnet (YAG) laser posterior capsulotomy was not required. However, PCO was observed in 10 eyes in group B, 6 of which subsequently underwent YAG laser posterior capsulotomy at the last follow-up. Lens instability such as dislocation or subluxations was not observed during the follow-up period.

Conclusions: PPPC combined with phacovitrectomy may lead to hyperopic refractive changes. However, this was a safe and effective approach to prevent PCO and additional YAG laser posterior capsulotomy.

Å°¿öµå

Capsule opacification; Phacoemulsification; Vitrectomy

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

  

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI
KoreaMed
KAMS