European journal of ophthalmology · 2022
Pillar tarsoconjunctival flap: An alternative approach for the management of refractory corneal ulcer.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zamorano-Martin Francisco, Rocha-de-Lossada Carlos, Rodriguez-Calvo-de-Mora Marina, Sanchez-España Juan Carlos, Garcia-Lorente Maria, Borroni Davide, Peraza-Nieves Jorge, Ortiz-Perez Santiago, Torras-Sanvicens Josep
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To report the effectiveness of the surgical procedure of the tarsoconjunctival flap (FTC) in patients with severe ocular surface impairment refractory to previous conventional treatments.
METHODS: A retrospective, noncomparative, consecutive case series.
RESULTS: Pillar tarsoconjunctival flap (PTCF) was performed in eight eyes of eight patients. Three patients had neurotrophic corneal ulcer (NCU), three had exposure keratopathy and two had corneal melting. Seven of them had satisfactory postoperative results, showing total corneal re-epithelialization that lasted throughout the postoperative follow-up (mean 10.33 ± 2.65 months [SD], range 6 to 12 months). Mean time for the re-epithelization was 11.28 ± 8.97 days [SD] (range 4 to 30 days).
CONCLUSION: This study suggest PTCF is a valid alternative to tarsorrhaphy in cases of persistent epithelial defect (PED) or NCU resistant to conventional treatments. Notwithstanding, prospective comparative trials comparing PTFC with conventional and/or novel therapies in PED or NCU are needed to corroborate these findings.
METHODS: A retrospective, noncomparative, consecutive case series.
RESULTS: Pillar tarsoconjunctival flap (PTCF) was performed in eight eyes of eight patients. Three patients had neurotrophic corneal ulcer (NCU), three had exposure keratopathy and two had corneal melting. Seven of them had satisfactory postoperative results, showing total corneal re-epithelialization that lasted throughout the postoperative follow-up (mean 10.33 ± 2.65 months [SD], range 6 to 12 months). Mean time for the re-epithelization was 11.28 ± 8.97 days [SD] (range 4 to 30 days).
CONCLUSION: This study suggest PTCF is a valid alternative to tarsorrhaphy in cases of persistent epithelial defect (PED) or NCU resistant to conventional treatments. Notwithstanding, prospective comparative trials comparing PTFC with conventional and/or novel therapies in PED or NCU are needed to corroborate these findings.