论文部分内容阅读
背景:图形视诱发电位在弱视形态和机制方面的研究取得了许多重要成果,但用于弱视治疗方法和评价疗效方面的研究较少。目的:观察斜视性弱视幼猫经六面标准化模式刺激治疗箱治疗后的图形视诱发电位改变,评价模式刺激治疗箱治疗斜视性弱视幼猫效果的可靠性。设计:随机对照实验研究。地点和对象:实验在青岛大学医学院附属医院完成,4周龄健康家猫36只,雌雄不分,体质量350～420g,本院动物实验室饲养。干预:将动物随机分为正常组、斜视组和斜视治疗组各12只。斜视组和治疗组均在4周龄时行外直肌切断+部分切除手术,产生内斜视。8周龄时,治疗组行非斜视眼眼睑缝合造成遮盖治疗模型,其中6只猫只接受自然刺激治疗(治疗Ⅰ组),另6只猫追加模式刺激治疗(治疗Ⅱ组)。主要观察指标:麻醉下记录各组图形视诱发电位,观察治疗后与治疗前、斜视未治疗组和对照组P1波振幅和潜时变化,比较治疗Ⅰ,Ⅱ组治疗前后振幅和潜时变化差值。结果:两治疗组治疗后4,8周P1波潜时缩短、振幅增高,与治疗前及同周龄未治疗斜视组相比差异均有显著性意义(P<0.05或P<0.01)。两治疗组治疗4,8周时治疗前后P1波潜时、振幅的均数差值比较,除治疗后4周两组振幅均数差值相比差异无显著性意义(P>0.05)外,振幅潜时均数差值和4周潜时均数差值比差异均有显著?
BACKGROUND: Many important achievements have been made in the study of the pattern visual evoked potentials in the form and mechanism of amblyopia. However, few studies have been done on the methods of treating amblyopia and evaluating the curative effect. OBJECTIVE: To observe the changes of the pattern visual evoked potentials (ERPs) of strabismic amblyopia kittens after stimulating the treatment box with six normalized modes, and to evaluate the reliability of the mode stimulating treatment kit for treatment of strabismic amblyopia kittens. Design: Randomized controlled trial. Location and Subjects: The experiment was performed in the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University Medical College. There were 36 healthy domestic cats of 4 weeks old, both male and female, weighing 350-420g and housed in our laboratory. Intervention: The animals were randomly divided into normal group, strabismus group and strabismus treatment group, 12 each. Strabismus group and treatment group were 4 weeks of age, lateral rectus excision + partial resection surgery, resulting in esotropia. At 8 weeks of age, the treatment group received non-strabismus eyelid suture occlusion treatment model, of which 6 cats received only natural stimulation treatment (treatment group Ⅰ), and the other 6 cats additional mode stimulation treatment (treatment group Ⅱ). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Visual evoked potentials were recorded under anesthesia in each group. Changes of amplitude and latency of P1 wave in untreated group and control group after treatment were compared with those in untreated and untreated groups. Changes in amplitude and latency were compared between groups Ⅰ and Ⅱ before and after treatment value. Results: At 4 weeks and 8 weeks after treatment, P1 wave latency and amplitude increased in both treatment groups compared with untreated strabismus group before and after treatment (P <0.05 or P <0.01). The mean difference of amplitude and amplitude of P1 wave before and after treatment in the two treatment groups at 4 and 8 weeks after treatment did not show significant difference (P> 0.05) except for the amplitude difference between the two groups after 4 weeks of treatment. The difference between the mean amplitude difference and the mean difference between the 4-week mean latency is significant?