Journal of current ophthalmology · 2017
Comparison of free conjunctival autograft versus amniotic membrane transplantation for pterygium surgery.
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.
Akbari Mitra, Soltani-Moghadam Reza, Elmi Ramin, Kazemnejad Ehsan
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the recurrence rate and surgical outcomes of amniotic membrane transplantation (AMT) and free conjunctival autograft (CAT) for pterygium surgery.
METHODS: In this prospective study, 60 patients with primary pterygium were randomly assigned to two groups of CAT or AMT and were compared in terms of recurrence rate, mean healing time of corneal epithelial defects, the mean level of inflammation, and complications.
RESULTS: The mean ± SD age of patients was 48.98 ± 9.8 years (range, 27-71 years). 73.3% were men, and 26.7% were women. The groups did not differ with respect to demographic characteristics (P > 0.05). Patients were followed for an average of 12.6 ± 1.3 months. The recurrence rates were 6.7% and 3.3% in the AMT and CAT groups, respectively (P > 0.05). Comparison of mean inflammation score showed higher inflammation in the AMT group in the first, third, and sixth postoperative month (P < 0.05). Mean healing times of corneal epithelial defects were 2.5 ± 0.572 and 2.67 ± 0.479 days in the CAT and AMT groups, respectively (P = 0.173).
CONCLUSIONS: No significant complication was observed during or after both surgical methods. No statistically significant difference was seen in visual acuity changes and epithelial healing in CAT and AMT groups, but more inflammation and recurrence rate were seen in AMT group.
METHODS: In this prospective study, 60 patients with primary pterygium were randomly assigned to two groups of CAT or AMT and were compared in terms of recurrence rate, mean healing time of corneal epithelial defects, the mean level of inflammation, and complications.
RESULTS: The mean ± SD age of patients was 48.98 ± 9.8 years (range, 27-71 years). 73.3% were men, and 26.7% were women. The groups did not differ with respect to demographic characteristics (P > 0.05). Patients were followed for an average of 12.6 ± 1.3 months. The recurrence rates were 6.7% and 3.3% in the AMT and CAT groups, respectively (P > 0.05). Comparison of mean inflammation score showed higher inflammation in the AMT group in the first, third, and sixth postoperative month (P < 0.05). Mean healing times of corneal epithelial defects were 2.5 ± 0.572 and 2.67 ± 0.479 days in the CAT and AMT groups, respectively (P = 0.173).
CONCLUSIONS: No significant complication was observed during or after both surgical methods. No statistically significant difference was seen in visual acuity changes and epithelial healing in CAT and AMT groups, but more inflammation and recurrence rate were seen in AMT group.