Journal francais d'ophtalmologie · 2010
[Limbal-conjunctival autograft in pterygium surgery].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание 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.
Mery G, Maalouf T, George J-L, Angioi K
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to estimate the efficacy of limbal-conjunctival autograft in the treatment of pterygium.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study including 15 patients (16 eyes) operated on for pterygium by limbal-conjunctival autograft. The examination included the search for risk factors and visual acuity, as well as corneal astigmatism and pterygium measurement. The follow-up included an examination at day 8, 1 month, and 3 months and assessed the integration of the transplant on the eye's surface, the aesthetic aspect, and recurrence. We describe the patients' characteristics, visual acuity, and astigmatism before and after surgery.
RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 56 years (range, 31-81 years). Before surgery, irritative signs and astigmatism, were found in 37% and impaired visual acuity in 81%. The mean duration of the follow-up after surgery was 19 months. Visual acuity and astigmatism improved in 56% of our patients. All transplants and harvest sites had a satisfactory macroscopic aspect. However, one patient suffered from a corneal invasion by fibrovascular tissue, 7 months postoperatively, which remained stable at the end of follow-up.
DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: In our study, the limbal-conjunctival autograft was a safe and effective surgical treatment with a very low recurrence rate at long-term follow-up.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study including 15 patients (16 eyes) operated on for pterygium by limbal-conjunctival autograft. The examination included the search for risk factors and visual acuity, as well as corneal astigmatism and pterygium measurement. The follow-up included an examination at day 8, 1 month, and 3 months and assessed the integration of the transplant on the eye's surface, the aesthetic aspect, and recurrence. We describe the patients' characteristics, visual acuity, and astigmatism before and after surgery.
RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 56 years (range, 31-81 years). Before surgery, irritative signs and astigmatism, were found in 37% and impaired visual acuity in 81%. The mean duration of the follow-up after surgery was 19 months. Visual acuity and astigmatism improved in 56% of our patients. All transplants and harvest sites had a satisfactory macroscopic aspect. However, one patient suffered from a corneal invasion by fibrovascular tissue, 7 months postoperatively, which remained stable at the end of follow-up.
DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: In our study, the limbal-conjunctival autograft was a safe and effective surgical treatment with a very low recurrence rate at long-term follow-up.