4.6 Article

Oxygen Saturation in Central Retinal Vein Occlusion

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
卷 150, 期 6, 页码 871-875

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2010.06.020

关键词

-

资金

  1. ICELANDIC CENTER FOR RESEARCH (RANNIS)
  2. EIMSKIP UNIVERSITY
  3. University of Iceland
  4. Landspitali-University Hospital
  5. Helga Jonsdottir and Sigurlioi Kristjansson Memorial Fund, Reykjavik, Iceland

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE: To test whether oxygen saturation is affected in retinal blood vessels in patients with central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). DESIGN: Prospective observational case series. METHODS: Oxygen saturation of hemoglobin was measured in retinal blood vessels in 10 patients with unilateral CRVO. The duration of CRVO before measurement was from 1 day to about 6 months. Two patients were excluded because of poor quality of oximetry images. The spectrophotometric retinal oximeter is based on a fundus camera. It simultaneously captures images of the retina at 605 nm and 586 nm and calculates optical density (absorbance) of retinal vessels at both wavelengths. The ratio of the 2 optical densities is approximately linearly related to hemoglobin oxygen saturation. Mean oxygen saturation was calculated for first- and second-degree arterioles and venules in both eyes of each patient. RESULTS: The mean oxygen saturation of hemoglobin in retinal venules was 49% +/- 12% (mean +/- SD, n = 8) in eyes affected by CRVO and 65% +/- 6% in unaffected fellow eyes (P = .003). The mean arteriolar oxygen saturation was 99% +/- 3% in CRVO eyes and 99% 6% in the fellow eyes. Venular oxygen saturation was variable within and between CRVO eyes. CONCLUSIONS: Oxygen saturation in retinal venules is lower in eyes with CRVO than in fellow eyes and there is considerable variability within and between CRVO eyes. Arteriolar saturation is the same in CRVO and fellow eyes. Retinal oxygenation is disturbed in CRVO. (Am J Ophthalmol 2010;150:871-875. (C) 2010 by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据