Pterygium surgery: conjunctival rotation autograft versus conjunctival autograft.

BACKGROUND AND

OBJECTIVES

To compare the safety and efficacy of conjunctival rotation autograft to conjunctival autograft in primary pterygium surgery.

PATIENTS AND

METHODS

A prospective randomized study was performed of 39 eyes in 31 patients who had undergone pterygium surgery. Nineteen eyes were treated by conjunctival rotation autograft (Group A). Twenty eyes were treated by conjunctival autograft (Group B). Follow up ranged from 8 to 12 months (mean 11 months). Recurrence was defined as postoperative regrowth of 2 mm fibrovascular tissue onto clear cornea in the area of previous pterygium excision. Four eyes were excluded from the study. Delayed wound healing occurred in 11.76% of eyes, and 5.88% of eyes had persistent congestion in Group A. A loose graft was present in 5.55% of eyes, and 5.55% of eyes had dellen formation in Group B.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that conjunctival rotation autograft and conjunctival autograft are both equally effective methods to reduce the recurrence rate after pterygium surgery. Conjunctival rotation autograft can be tried as an alternative attractive procedure for pterygium surgery to reduce the chances of recurrence. However, a larger, randomized, prospective double masked study with more patients and a longer follow up will eventually demonstrate the superiority of one procedure over the other.