目的:鉴于视网膜中央静脉阻塞central retinal vein occlusion(CRVO);所致持续性黄斑水肿persistent
macular edema(ME);治疗有很多争议，探讨更有效的治疗办法。方法:玻璃体腔注射曲安奈德(TA)31 例、注射
抗血管内皮生长因子单克隆抗体(Ranibizumab)30 例，和两组中注药加激光21 例，通过测量视力、眼压，中央视
网膜厚度等方面来探讨玻璃体腔注射Ranibizumab 、TA 和注药+ 激光光凝治疗效果，并应用统计学方法进行分
析对比。结果:注射Ranibizumab 组和TA 组:最佳矫正视力在注药前后对比，两组均有显著统计学差异。中央
视网膜厚度在注药前后对比，两组亦均有统计学差异。结论:玻璃体腔注射TA 与Ranibizumab 在治疗CRVO 继
发黄斑水肿时，均在短期内能明显降低水肿的视网膜和改善视力，Ranibizumab 反复注射的次数要比TA 多一些;
TA 比Ranibizumab 副作用多，安全性差。激光和注药相比并不能够改善视力，但对减轻水肿和防止新生血管性
青光眼有作用，故在必须时要慎重选择。

Objective:Central retinal vein occlusion ( CRVO) induced persistent macular edema
(ME) by more effective measures，as there is a lot of controversy treatment． Methods: injection of triamcinolone
acetonide ( TA) was in 31 cases，vascular endothelial growth factor monoclonal antibody
(Ranibizumab)was in 30 cases，and 21 cases was drug injection plus laser in two groups，the visual acuity，
intraocular pressure，central retinal thickness ( CRT) were measured to evaluate the treatment
effect of intravitreal injection of Ranibizumab，TA and injection + laser photocoagulation，and statistical
methods were used for analysis and comparison． Results:The best － corrected visual acuity(BCVA)are
significant difference compared with before injections． The central retinal thickness are also． Conclusion:
Intravitreal injections of TA and Ranibizumab in two groups are effective in the treatment of CRVO
secondary to CME． The number of repeated injection of Ranibizumab is more than that of TA;TA
has some more side effect，poor safety，Laser and injection then cannot improve eyesight，but they can
alleviate edema and neovascular glaucoma，so when necessary，they can be chosen，but not excessive
treatment．

R774