AlM:To compare the efficacy and safety of latanoprost and brimonidine in the treatment of open angle glaucoma, and provide reference for rational drug use.METHODS:A total of 121 cases ( 136 eyes ) who were diagnosed as primary open angle glaucoma were selected in this study, and they were randomly divided into experimental group (62 cases, 70 eyes) and control group ( 59 cases, 66 eyes) according to different drug treatment. Patients in the control group received brimonidine eye drops twice a day, while patients in the experimental group received latanoprost eye drops once a day. The intraocular pressure, visual acuity and adverse reactions were checked of the two groups in the following 3mo.RESULTS:The intraocular pressure of patients in the control group was 18. 1 ± 1. 3mmHg, while the experimental group was 17. 0 ± 0. 9mmHg after 12wk of treatment, which were both lower than before (P<0. 05). The fluctuation of intraocular pressure in the experimental group was significantly lower than that of the control group. There was no significant difference in the LogMAR visual acuity between before and after treatment in the control group, while the LogMAR visual acuity of the experimental group was significantly improved. The control group had hyperemia, burning sensation, tearing, eyelid edema and other adverse side effects, and the experimental group had little adverse reactions. CONCLUSlON: Latanoprost can significantly reduce intraocular pressure in glaucoma patients with in the follow- up time, and reduce the impact of elevated intraocular pressure in the vision of glaucoma patients, with little adverse reaction, worthy of clinical application.

AIM: To investigate the efficiency of intravitreal ranibizumab therapy ( IVR ) for polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy ( PCV) in single or multiple polyps.
METHODS: A total 63 patients diagnosed with PCV in Shaoxing City People's Hospital from May 2013 to May 2015 were enrolled and divided into single polyp group and multiple polyps group. All patients received intravitreal ranibizumab 3 monthly and were followed up for 12mo. Observe the changes of best corrected visual acuity ( BCVA ) and central retinal thickness ( CRT ) at different time points.
RESULTS: The single polyps group exhibited a better BCVA, shorter greatest linear dimension, and lower prevalence of fibro - vascular pigment epithelial detachment compared with the multiple polyp group before treatment (P<0. 05). Significant difference of BCVA were observed at 3, 6 and 12mo between the two groups (P<0. 05). BCVA at 3, 6, 12mo was significantly better than that at baseline in single polyps group. The single polyp group exhibited a significantly thinner CRT at 6 and 12mo compared with multiple polyps group (P<0. 05). The single polyp group showed improvement in CRT over the followed up period(P<0. 05). The CRT in multiple polyps group at 3 and 6mo significantly decreased compared with preoperative (P<0. 05).
CONCLUSION: IVR meet better result in PCV patients with multiple polyp and polyp numbers may be valuable to prognosis.

Objective To investigate the effectiveness and safety of rosuvastatin and simvastatin in the treatment of hyperlipidemia. Methods The database including CNKI, VIP, Wanfang data base and CBM were retrieved to search the clinical randomized controlled trials (RCT) of rosuvastatin and simvastatin in the treatment of hyperlipidemia, and the data were analyzed with Review Manager 5.2. Results Eighteen RCTs were included with a total sample size of 1819 cases with hyperlipidemia, in which there were 917 patients in rosuvastatin group and 902 in simvastatin group. The Meta-analysis results showed that there were significantly lower serum levels of total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), triglyceride (TG) and significantly higher level of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) in rosuvastatin group compared with those of simvastatin group [(MD=-0.15, 95%CI:-0.22--0.09, P<0.01), (MD=-0.18, 95%CI:-0.25--0.11, P<0.01), (MD=-0.23, 95%CI:-0.28--0.19, P<0.01) and (MD=-0.11, 95%CI:-0.06--0.15, P<0.01)]. There was no significant difference in the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse reaction between the two groups. Conclusion The current clinical evidences show that rosuvastatin has a better effect on the treatment of hyperlipidemia, and has no adverse reactions.