A COMPARATIVE STUDY TO EVALUATE THE CLINICAL OUTCOME OF CONJUNCTIVAL LIMBAL AUTOGRAFT AND AMNIOTIC MEMBRANE TRANSPLANT FOR THE TREATMENT OF PRIMARY PTERYGIUM
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22159/ajpcr.2023.v16i10.49311Keywords:
pterygium, Amniotic membrane, Conjunctival limbal auto graft, limbal stem cellsAbstract
Objective: The aim of the study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of the conjunctival limbal autograft (CLAG) and amniotic membrane transplantation (AMT).
Methods: After a full pre-operative assessment 100 patients with primary pterygium attending the ophthalmology outpatient department of a teaching hospital in Eastern India, fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected for our study. The patients were explained the procedure of the study and possible outcomes. They were divided into two groups. Group A: Where 10-0 nylon was to be used for CLAG after pterygium excision. Group B: Where 10-0 nylon was to be used for AMT after pterygium excision.
Results: There was marked improvement in vision postoperatively more in the AMT group than CLAG. In the AMT group: 34% had a visual acuity of LogMAR 0.00, 30% had LogMAR 0.12, 12% had LogMAR 0.18, and 24% had LogMAR 0.30 after the surgery. In the CLAG group: 52% had a visual acuity of LogMAR, 20% had LogMAR 0.12, 22% had LogMAR 0.18, and 6% had LogMAR 0.30 after the surgery. Graft and suture-related complications were more in the CLAG group than in the amniotic membrane (AM) graft group.
Conclusion: In the present study, The CLAG group was found to be associated with more discomfort, and more post-operative complications than AMT. AM may provide a basement membrane rich in various growth factors and matrix proteins, which promotes epithelial cell migration, adhesion, and differentiation. It is also believed to have anti-inflammatory and antifibrotic effects and exerts anti-scarring effects through the transforming growth factor-β pathway. AMT may be a superior treatment in primary pterygium due to lower recurrence rate, shorter surgical times, and better visual and cosmetic outcomes.
Downloads
References
Saw SM, Tan D. Pterygium: Prevalence, demography and risk factors. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 1999;6:219-28. doi: 10.1076/opep.6.3.219.1504, PMID 10487976
Young AL, Cao D, Chu WK, Ng TK, Yip YW, Jhanji V, et al. The evolving story of pterygium. Cornea 2018;37 Suppl 1:S55-7. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000001744, PMID 30216333
Bradley JC, Yang W, Bradley RH, Reid TW, Schwab IR. The science of pterygia. Br J Ophthalmol 2010;94:815-20. doi: 10.1136/ bjo.2008.151852, PMID 19515643
Li L, Zhong H, Tian E, Yu M, Yuan Y, Yang W, et al. Five-Year incidence and predictors for pterygium in a rural community in China: The yunnan minority eye study. Cornea 2015;34:1564-8.
Nemesure B, Wu SY, Hennis A, Leske MC, Barbados Eye Studies Group. Nine-year incidence and risk factors for pterygium in the Barbados eye studies. Ophthalmology 2008;115:2153-8. doi: 10.1016/j. ophtha.2008.08.003, PMID 18930552
Moran DJ, Hollows FC. Pterygium and ultraviolet radiation: A positive correlation. Br J Ophthalmol 1984;68:343-6.
Detorakis ET, Sourvinos G, Spandidos DA. Detection of herpes simplex virus and human papillomavirus in ophthalmic pterygium. Cornea 2001;20:164-7. doi: 10.1097/00003226-200103000-00010, PMID 11248821
Kau HC, Tsai CC, Hsu WM, Liu JH, Wei YH. Genetic polymorphism of hOGG1 and risk of pterygium in Chinese. Eye (Lond) 2004;18:635-9.
Cárdenas-Cantú E, Zavala J, Valenzuela J, Valdez-García JE. Molecular basis of pterygium development. Semin Ophthalmol 2016;31:567-83. doi: 10.3109/08820538.2014.971822, PMID 25415268
Chui J, Di Girolamo N, Wakefield D, Coroneo MT. The pathogenesis of pterygium: current concepts and their therapeutic implications. Ocul Surf 2008;6:24-43. doi: 10.1016/s1542-0124(12)70103-9, PMID 18264653
Pinkerton OD, Hokama Y, Shigemura LA. Immunologic basis for the pathogenesis of pterygium. Am J Ophthalmol 1984;98:225-8. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(87)90358-8, PMID 6383051
Matsuoka M, Ogata N, Minamino K, Matsumura M. Expression of pigment epithelium-derived factor and vascular endothelial growth factor in fibrovascular membranes from patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Jpn J Ophthalmol 2006;50:116-20. doi: 10.1007/ s10384-005-0294-9, PMID 16604386
Peng ML, Tsai YY, Chiang CC, Huang YC, Chou MC, Yeh KT, et al. CYP1A1 protein activity is associated with allelic variation in pterygium tissues and cells. Mol Vis 2012;18:1937-43. PMID 22876118
Tong L, Li J, Chew J, Tan D, Beuerman R. Phospholipase D in the human ocular surface and in pterygium. Cornea 2008;27:693-8.
Ortak H, Cayli S, Ocakli S, Demir S. Increased expression of Aquaporin-1 and Aquaporin-3 in pterygium. Cornea 2013;32:1375-9. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e31829b6d2a, PMID 23974882
Coroneo MT, Di Girolamo N, Wakefield D. The pathogenesis of pterygia. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 1999;10:282-8. doi: 10.1097/00055735- 199908000-00011, PMID 10621537
Memarzadeh F, Fahd AK, Shamie N, Chuck RS. Comparison of de-epithelialized amniotic membrane transplantation and conjunctival autograft after primary pterygium excision. Eye (Lond) 2008;22:107- 12. doi: 10.1038/sj.eye.6702453, PMID 16763656
Tseng SC, Prabhasawat P, Lee SH. Amniotic membrane transplantation for conjunctival surface reconstruction. Am J Ophthalmol 1997;124:765- 74. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9394(14)71693-9, PMID 9402822
Malik KPS, Goel R, Gupta A, Gupta SK, Kamal S, MAllik VK, et al. Efficacy of sutureless and glue free limbal conjunctival autograft for primary pterygium surery. Nepal J Ophthalmol Biannu Peer -Rev Acad J Nepal Ophthalmol Soc NEPJOPH 2012;4:230-5.
Elwan SAM. Comparison between sutureless and glue free versus sutured limbal conjunctival autograft in primary pterygium surgery. Saudi J Ophthalmol 2014;28:292-8.
Sharma A, Raj H, Gupta A, Raina AV. Sutureless and glue-free versus sutures for limbal conjunctival autografting in primary pterygium surgery: A prospective comparative study. J Clin Diagn Res 2015;9:NC06-9. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/15689.6789, PMID 26675383
Singh PS, Chakma AK, Phuritsabam B, Laishram M, Maibam N, Marina A. Sutureless and glue free conjunctivo-limbal autograft in primary pterygium surgery: outcomes and recurrence rate. J Evol Med Dent Sci 2014;3:4029-36.
Kodavoor SK, Ramamurthy D, Solomon R. Outcomes of pterygium surgery-glue versus autologous blood versus sutures for graft fixation-an analysis. Oman J Ophthalmol 2018;11:227-31. doi: 10.4103/ojo. OJO_4_2017, PMID 30505112
Chowdhury S, Dutta J, Mukhopadhyay S, Basu R, Bera S, Savale S, et al. Comparison of autologous in situ blood coagulum versus sutures for conjunctival autografting after pterygium excision. Int Ophthalmol 2014;34:41-8.
Toker E, Erasalan M. Recurrence After primary pterygium excision: amniotic membrane transplantation with fibrin glue versus conjunctival autograft with fibrin glue. Curr Eye Res 2016;41:1-8.
Prasad SC, Goudinho SJ, Isaac SM, Sumangala SG. Sutureless versus suture technique for Conjunctivolimbal autografting in primary pterygium excision: A prospective study. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol 2021;28:208-10. doi: 10.4103/meajo.meajo_533_20, PMID 35719283, PMCID PMC9198530
Clearfield E, Muthappan V, Wang X, Kuo IC. Conjunctival autograft for pterygium. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;2:CD011349. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011349.pub2, PMID 26867004, PMCID PMC5032146
Yin CJ, Bao YL, Zhang QC, Kang SF, Chen GL. Comparison of postoperative recovery of primary pterygium excision combined with either limbal stem cell transplantation or amniotic membrane transplantation: A randomized controlled trial-based meta-analysis. Am J Transl Res 2023;15:641-52. PMID 36915777, PMCID PMC10006757
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2023 Arkendu Chatterjee, Shafaque Sahar, Rupam Roy, Udayaditya Mukhopadhyay
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The publication is licensed under CC By and is open access. Copyright is with author and allowed to retain publishing rights without restrictions.
