“兒童驗光是否需要使用睫狀肌麻痹劑散瞳”這一問題在同行中長期爭論不休。支持方認為兒童年齡越小,調節力越強,驗光必須使用睫狀肌麻痹劑散瞳;反對方則主張先做視功能檢查,有調節異常等情況時才做睫狀肌麻痹驗光,一般可直接進行主覺驗光。那么美國視光師是如何看待這一問題呢?筆者通過與諾華西南大學兒童視光和雙眼視學科主任Yin C. Tea教授進行深入溝通后,將觀點整理如下:
Dry Retinoscopy would be preferred objective measure of refractive error. Autorefraction will tend to over-minus children. Phoropter is used if child can sit appropriately, otherwise a hand-held lens rack (skiascopy bar).
采用電腦驗光儀為兒童驗光容易出現負鏡過矯(近視過矯)的情況,所以,應采用小瞳孔下檢影驗光。若兒童能配合檢查,則可以使用綜合驗光儀做主覺驗光,若不能配合,則使用手持排鏡檢查。
注:Dry Retinoscopy(干性驗光),指無睫狀肌麻痹時的驗光,筆者翻譯為小瞳驗光;skiascopy bar是一種手持排鏡,相當于把不同屈光度的鏡片按屈光度大小順序組合在一個手持的條狀排列的鏡片條組,方便快速切換球鏡,如圖1。

Minimal subjective refraction depending on ability and reliability of the child's responses.
主覺驗光依賴于兒童的配合能力和依從性。
Binocular Vision status assessed through tentative refraction - Accommodation, Vergence, Stereo, etc...
雙眼視檢查要通過實驗性測定調節、集合、立體視覺等來評估。
If patient has strabismus or amblyopia, Cycloplegic refraction also obtained with 2 drops of 1% cyclopentolate." Wet retinoscopy performed at least 30-45 min after instillation.
當患者患有斜視、弱視時,使用2滴1%的鹽酸環噴托酯(鹽酸環戊通)點眼做睫狀肌麻痹,滴眼30~45分鐘后做濕性檢影驗光。
注:Wet retinoscopy(濕性檢影驗光),指睫狀肌麻痹檢影驗光。
Yin C.Tea 教授平時不使用睫狀肌麻痹劑作為常規驗光的原因:
Cyclopentolate takes longer to take effect in regards to cycloplegia and has poor dilating action.I can always use in addition to regular dilating drops (tropicamide and phenyl), but this means more drops for children who already don’t do well with eyedrops, so if there is no added benefit, I do not use.
鹽酸環噴托酯(鹽酸環戊通)滴眼后產生睫狀肌麻痹效果所需時間較長,且散瞳作用微弱。若給患者使用托吡卡胺后再用鹽酸環噴托酯(鹽酸環戊通),則會給兒童滴更多眼液,而兒童通常不喜歡滴眼液,若無額外益處則不使用。
I use secondary BV tests to analyze the accom/verg system through tentative refractive correction, so if I do not suspect excess accommodation is occurring in my patient, based on the secondary BV test results, then I will not dilate with cycloplentolate.
在主觀驗光過程中,通過雙眼視檢查分析調節/集合系統,若未發現調節過度的情況,則不用睫狀肌麻痹劑。
I have become very good at retinoscopy on children and do not find a significant difference in my dry ret results vs.the cycloplegic or wet ret results, where it would effect my prescribing decision.
在主觀驗光過程中,若視光師的小瞳檢影技術熟練,干性驗光和濕性驗光結果無顯著差異,則不用睫狀肌麻痹劑。
There is a natural amount of healthy tonic accommodation in children that does not need to be corrected for if there is normal BV, so I do not need to release that level of hyperopia to make my prescribing decisions.
如果兒童雙眼視功能正常,則雙眼本身有一定量的調節張力,無需矯正,也不會使用睫狀肌麻痹劑。
Yin C.Tea教授偶爾會選擇使用睫狀肌麻痹的情況:
Symptomatic, patients demonstrating unstable accommodation that is affecting refractive error.NO strabismus or amblyopia.
患者表現出不穩定的調節癥狀,屈光狀態波動(無斜視或弱視的情況)。
Patients with accommodative spasms - generally same patients as above.
患者調節痙攣,常與上述情況一樣。
The reason the decision is sometimes, rather than always,is because if I don't think the effect is very strong based on my BV findings, I may just do a second retinoscopy after regular dilation drops for time.
有時若睫狀肌麻痹的效果不充分,Yin C.Tea 教授會在藥效后再做一次檢影驗光來確認。當然,不是每次都這樣做。
Yin C.Tea教授總是使用睫狀肌麻痹的情況是:
注:其前提是患者有時間等待而且同意用藥。
The patient has strabismus or amblyopia.
患者有斜視或者弱視。
The patient has significant anisometropia even without strabismus or amblyopia.
即使沒有斜弱視,但患者有明顯的屈光參差。
The patient has Esophoria even after full (+) found in dry refraction.
主覺驗光時即使給足了正鏡,患者還是表現出內隱斜。
The patient is demonstrating strong accommodative spasms that make me unable to get stable BV findings and difficult to determine appropriate spectacle Rx.
患者有非常明顯的調節痙攣,視光師很難獲得穩定的雙眼視檢查結果并據此給處方。
In clinic, I depend on my BV findings to determine if accommodation is contaminating my refraction, rather than just depend on a cycloplegia to eliminate accommodation completely. Cycloplegia is not a natural condition for children in the real world.Cycloplegia only eliminates the accommodation, but there is the accom/vergence link that can’t be ignored.In real life, the child’s accommodative/vergence behavior is more important to me than accommodation by itself.In real life, the two systems are inseparable, so the cycloplegia is a limited assessment of what is going on in the child’s visual system. Eliminating that natural accom/verg link with cycloplegia will not tell me how why that system is in spasm or chooses to behave with excess accommodation.
Yin C.Tea教授強調,臨床上她依據雙眼視檢查結果判斷調節是否影響屈光檢查,而非僅依賴睫狀肌麻痹劑完全去除調節。畢竟睫狀肌麻痹狀態并非兒童正常的生理狀態,且與調節和集合有關聯,不能忽略。實際生活中,調整調節/集合的關聯平衡比調節本身更重要,這兩個系統不可分割,所以睫狀肌麻痹驗光是一種局限的檢查方式。使用睫狀肌麻痹劑會破壞人本身的調節與集合的關系,在這種情況下,無法準確清晰地反映出眼部狀態是被動的調節痙攣還是主動的代償性調節超前。
筆者認為美國視光師進行兒童驗光常規并非都用睫狀肌麻痹驗光,用或不用睫狀肌麻痹劑都是有條件的。如果近視兒童伴有視功能異常,比如:調節痙攣(假性近視),集合不足,調節性集合與調節的比值(AC/A)異常等情況,這時,如果使用睫狀肌麻痹劑麻痹調節,會破壞調節/集合的聯動關系,無法進一步分析視功能檢查的結果。
最好的方法是先做“小瞳驗光”和視功能檢查(不使用睫狀肌麻痹劑),再根據結果判斷是否需擴瞳驗光,比如,負相對調節(NRA)檢查發現調節不能放松,則提示調節緊張,可考慮睫狀肌麻痹驗光。但從我國目前實際情況來看,操作上述理論較難。美國視光行業成熟,視光師接受過長時間高等教育,能靈活把握兒童睫狀肌麻痹的用藥原則。而我國視光學起步晚,市場較不規范,從業人員參差不齊,難以準確使用兒童睫狀肌麻痹劑的知識技能。
筆者從兒童驗光是否要求使用睫狀肌麻痹劑的優缺點進行了分析。要求使用睫狀肌麻痹劑,其優點是可避免近視過矯,但破壞了調節與集合的關系,無法分析視功能,無法做進一步的個性化配鏡和近視防控;不要求使用睫狀肌麻痹劑,其優點是可分析視功能異常,反映正常情況下(無睫狀肌麻痹)的狀態,但視光師驗光操作不熟練時易出現近視過矯問題,進而導致近視發生。
所以,從我國國情出發,筆者認為可以采取“一刀切”的方式,要求兒童驗光務必使用睫狀肌麻痹,其驗光雖不能做到精益求精,但避免了過矯導致的近視發展。o
注:Yin C. Tea 教授在調節集合、兒童斜弱視、視覺訓練等領域有深入研究,是兒童視光學和雙眼視領域的專家。
作者簡介:上海新虹橋國際醫學園區美視美景眼科中心院長