目的：探究雷珠单抗与康柏西普治疗非缺血型视网膜分支静脉阻塞黄斑水肿的疗效及安全性。

方法：选取我院于2014-03/2018-05收治的非缺血型视网膜分支静脉阻塞黄斑水肿患者80例80眼，随机分为A组(40例)和B组(40例)，分别行玻璃体腔内注射雷珠单抗和康柏西普治疗。随访3mo，比较治疗前后两组患者的眼压、CMT、黄斑中心体积(CMV)、BCVA、玻璃体腔注射次数和并发症发生情况。

结果：治疗后2wk，1、2、3mo，B组患者CMT、CMV、BCVA均明显优于A组(P<0.05)。随访3mo，B组患者视力提高比例显著高于A组(65% vs 38%，P<0.05)，玻璃体腔注射次数显著低于A组(P<0.05)，但两组患者并发症发生情况(5% vs 0%)无明显差异(P=0.999)。

结论：与雷珠单抗比较，康柏西普治疗非缺血型视网膜分支静脉阻塞黄斑水肿在改善视力，降低CMT和CMV，减少玻璃体腔注射次数方面具有一定优势。

METHODS: Totally 80 cases(80 macular edema eyes)with macular edema secondary to non-ischemic retinal vein occlusion patients enrolled into our hospital from March 2014 to May 2018 were collected into our study and randomly divided into the group A(40 cases)and the group B(40 cases). The patients in the group A and group B underwent ranibizumab and conbercept intravitreal injections, respectively. The intraocular pressure, central macular thickness(CMT), best corrected visual acuity(BCVA)and central macular volume(CMV), the number of injections and the occurrence of ocular complications before and after treatment of 2 groups were recorded and compared.

RESULTS: After treatment 2wk to 3mo, compared with the group A, the CMT, BCVA, CMV and the cases of intravitreal injections had decreased(P<0.05), meanwhile the visual acuity had increased in the group B(65% vs 38%, P<0.05), however, there was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups(5% vs 0%, P=0.999).

CONCLUSION: Compared with the ranibizumab, the conbercept has advantage in treatment of macular edema secondary to non-ischemic retinal vein occlusion by improving the visual acuity, reducing the CMT, CMV and the times of intravitreal injections.