目的：系统评价国产小牛血去蛋白提取物眼凝胶对准分子激光角膜屈光手术后角膜上皮修复的临床疗效和安全性。

方法：计算机检索Pubmed、Embase、Cochrane Library、维普中文科技期刊数据库、中国知网、万方数据库，查找国内外采用国产小牛血去蛋白提取物眼凝胶治疗准分子激光角膜屈光手术患者上皮修复的随机对照试验(RCT)，检索时限2007-01/2016-12。由 2 位研究成员根据纳入与排除标准独立筛选文献、提取资料和评价质量后，采用 Review Manager 5.3软件进行 Meta分析。

结果：最终纳入7个 RCT，共计患者1 042眼，其中治疗组523眼，对照组519眼。Meta分析结果显示：准分子激光角膜屈光术后应用国产小牛血去蛋白提取物眼凝胶在临床疗效、症状评分、角膜愈合时间方面均优于对照组，其差异均有统计学意义：临床疗效：OR=1.81，95%CI(1.39～2.35)，P<0.001； 准分子激光术后角膜损伤症状评分WMD = -0.33，95%CI(-0.45～-0.21)，P<0.001； 角膜愈合时间WMD =-1.26，95%CI(-1.56～-0.97)，P<0.001。

结论：应用国产小牛血去蛋白提取物眼凝胶可使准分子激光屈光术后患者不适症状减轻、角膜上皮恢复快、治疗有效率提高。受纳入研究质量和数量所限，上述结论尚需进一步开展严格设计的随机双盲对照试验加以验证。

METHODS:We performed a comprehensive search via Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, VIP Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database, CNKI and Wan Fang Chinese periodical Database for the randomized controlled trials(RCTs)at home and abroad about effects of the domestic deproteinized calf blood extract eye gel for corneal epithelial repair after laser corneal refractive surgery with retrieval time from January 2007 to December 2016. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 2 medical researchers independently screened documents, extracted data and evaluated the quality. Review Manager 5.3 software was used for Meta analysis.

RESULTS: Seven RCTs involving 1 042 eyes, including 523 eyes in the treatment group and 519 eyes in the control group, were selected for this Meta-analysis. The results showed that the clinical efficacy in the treatment group was better than that in the control group(OR=1.81, 95%CI: 1.39～2.35; P<0.001). And the corneal injury symptom score in the treatment group was superior to that in the control group(WMD=-0.33, 95%CI: -0.45 to -0.21; P<0.001). And the corneal healing time in the treatment group was shorter than that in the control group(WMD=-1.26, 95%CI: -1.56 to -0.97; P<0.001).

CONCLUSION: The domestic deproteinized calf blood extract eye gel can relieve the patients' symptoms after laser refractive surgery, improve the corneal epithelial recovery and the efficiency of treatment. Due to the limited quality and quantity of the studies these conclusions should be further validated by more well-designed randomized double blind controlled trials.