Treatment effect of Qi ming granule in preventing macular edema after phacoemulsification in diabetes

AIM: To evaluate the clinical therapeutic efficacy of the Qi ming granule for macular edema(ME)in diabetic patients after phacoemulsification.METHODS:In this was a prospective clinical comparison study, 57 diabetic patients(76 eyes)who underwent phacoemulsification were recruited and divided into tw...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Guo ji yan ke za zhi 2015-08, Vol.15 (8), p.1444-1446
Hauptverfasser: Jun Li, Song-Ping Yu, Tian-Yan Shi, Xiu-Zhen Zhang
Format: Artikel
Sprache:chi ; eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:AIM: To evaluate the clinical therapeutic efficacy of the Qi ming granule for macular edema(ME)in diabetic patients after phacoemulsification.METHODS:In this was a prospective clinical comparison study, 57 diabetic patients(76 eyes)who underwent phacoemulsification were recruited and divided into two groups: treatment group(34 eyes)and control group(42 eyes). All the patients in treatment group were given oral administration Qi ming granule(4.5g, tid)and vitamin C(0.1g, tid)for 6mo postoperatively, while vitamin C(0.1g, tid)for the controls. General clinical examinations, including blood glucose and glycated hemoglobin, as well as comprehensive standardized ophthalmic examinations were performed. Optical coherence tomography(OCT)were used to detect macular edema incidence and measure central field retinal thickness.RESULTS: No significant difference was found in the levels of blood glucose,glycated hemoglobin, course of disease, and macular thickness between the two groups during the initial visits. At the 6th month, 2 eyes(6%)eyes had clinically apparent macular edema in treatment group, while 6(14%)eyes had clinically apparent macular edema in control group(P=0.285). The central subfield retinal thickness values were significantly lower in the treatment group(211.76±41.21μm)than those in control group(278.36±48.94μm)(P
ISSN:1672-5123
1672-5123
DOI:10.3980/j.issn.1672-5123.2015.8.38