Acta Scientific Ophthalmology (ISSN: 2582-3191)

Research Article Volume 5 Issue 4

A Comparative Study between Sutureless, Glue-less Conjunctival Autograft vs Sutured Limbal Conjunctival Autograft for Primary Pterygium

Mandeep Singh Rai1, Neenu Kalra2, Anand Aggarwal1*, Rajinder Khalsa1, Divjot Kaur1, Indu Khosa1, Ravneet Kaur1 and Surmila Meena1

1Department of Ophthalmology, Government Medical College Patiala, Punjab, India
2Director, Kalra Eye and Maternity Hospital, Yamunanagar, Haryana, India

*Corresponding Author: Anand Aggarwal, Cornea, Glaucoma and Refractive Surgery Services, Department of Ophthalmology, Government Medical College Patiala, Punjab, India.

Received: February 25, 2022; Published: March 10, 2022

Abstract

Purpose: To compare and evaluate efficacy of two surgical techniques for management of primary pterygium in terms of post-operative signs, symptoms and complications.

Design: This was a comparative, prospective, randomized, open labelled parallel study.

Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, Government Medical College, Patiala, Punjab.

Methods: The study included 60 patients with primary pterygium. The mean age was 42 ± 10 years (range 22-62 years). Simple excision under local anaesthesia was performed followed by closure of the bare sclera by suture less and glue free conjunctival autograft in 30 patients (Group I), versus conventional method of a sutured conjunctival autograft in 30 patients (Group II).

Results: At Visit 1, 6 patients (20%) of Group I had Graft edema in comparison to 5 patients (16.67%) in Group II. Subcutaneous haemorrhage was noted in 6 (20%) patients in both the groups. Graft retraction was noticed in 4 patients (13.33%) in Group I and in 2 patients (6.66%) in Group II. Graft dislodgement was observed in 1 patient (3.33%) in Group I.

One (3.33%) case of recurrence was reported at 6 months in Group I whereas 2 (6.67%) cases were reported in Group II. One case of Granuloma was reported in Group II.

There were significantly lower post-operative signs and symptoms in group I as compared to group II in the first post-operative week and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (p value < 0.05) at visit 1 and visit 2. The satisfaction survey revealed higher overall satisfaction score for group I as compared to group II.

Conclusion: Sutureless technique may be considered as a viable alternative to sutured technique in terms of surgical outcomes. It scores better in terms of post-operative symptoms when compared to sutures.

Keywords: Pterygium Surgery; Sutureless Glue Free Conjunctival Autograft; Conjunctival Autograft

References

  1. Young AL., et al. “The evolving story of Pterygium”. Cornea 37 (2018): S55-S57.
  2. Mohammed I. “Treatment of pterygium”. Annals of African Medicine3 (2011): 197-203.
  3. Shahraki T., et al. “Pterygium: an update on pathophysiology, clinical features, and management”. Therapeutic Advances in Ophthalmology 13 (2021): 1-21.
  4. Singh SK. “Pterygium: epidemiology prevention and treatment”. Community Eye Health99 (2017): S5-S6.
  5. McCarty CA., et al. “Epidemiology of pterygium in Victoria, Australia”. British Journal of Ophthalmology 3 (2000): 289-292.
  6. Ishioka M., et al. “Pterygium and dry eye”. Ophthalmologica3 (2001): 209-211.
  7. Tan DT., et al. “Effect of pterygium morphology on pterygium recurrence in a controlled trial comparing conjunctival autografting with bare sclera excision”. Archives of Ophthalmology10 (1997): 1235-1240.
  8. Maheshwari S. “Pterygium-induced corneal refractive changes”. Indian Journal of Ophthalmology 5 (2007): 383-386.
  9. Tan C., et al. “Epidemiology of pterygium on a tropical island in the Riau Archipelago”. Eye 8 (2006): 908-912.
  10. Sandford-Smith J. “Eye diseases in hot climates”. Elsevier (2014): 63-78.
  11. Bahuva A and Rao SK. “Current concepts in management of pterygium”. Delhi Ophthalmological Society 2 (2015): 78-84.
  12. Fuest M., et al. “New treatment options for pterygium”. Expert Review of Ophthalmology 3 (2017): 193-196.
  13. Mejía LF., et al. “Comparison of 4 techniques for limbal-conjunctival autograft fixation in primary pterygium surgery”. European Journal of Ophthalmology 4 (2017): 466-469.
  14. Yan B., et al. “Modified sutureless and Glue-free method versus conventional sutures for Conjunctival autograft fixation in Primary Pterygium Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial”. Cornea 11 (2019): 1351-1357.
  15. Wang X., et al. “Comparison of fibrin glue and Vicryl sutures in conjunctival autografting for pterygium surgery”. Molecular Vision 4 (2017): 275.
  16. Chu WK., et al. “Pterygium: new insights”. Eye 6 (2020): 1047-1050.
  17. Thatte S., et al. “Efficacy of autologous serum in fixing conjunctival autografts of various sizes in different types and grades of pterygium”. Journal of Ophthalmic and Vision Research (JOVR) 2 (2019): 136.
  18. Elwan SA. “Comparison between sutureless and glue free versus sutured limbal conjunctival autograft in primary pterygium surgery”. Saudi Journal of Ophthalmology 4 (2014): 292-298.
  19. Bhargava P., et al. “Pterygium excision followed by sutureless and glue free infero-temporal conjunctival autograft”. Delhi Ophthalmological Society 1 (2019): 32-35.
  20. Das PJ., et al. “Pterygium surgery with conjunctival autograft with sutures versus suture-less and glue-less: A prospective comparative study”. International Journal of Ocular Oncology and Oculoplasty 4 (2019): 194-200.
  21. Malik K., et al. “Efficacy of sutureless and glue free limbal conjunctival autograft for primary pterygium surgery”. Nepalese Journal of Ophthalmology 2 (2012): 230-235.
  22. Foroutan A., et al. “Efficacy of autologous fibrin glue for primary pterygium surgery with conjunctival autograft”. Journal of Current Ophthalmology 1 (2011): 39-47.

Citation

Citation: Anand Aggarwal., et al. “A Comparative Study between Sutureless, Glue-less Conjunctival Autograft vs Sutured Limbal Conjunctival Autograft for Primary Pterygium".Acta Scientific Ophthalmology 5.4 (2022): 19-27.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2022 Anand Aggarwal., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.




Metrics

Acceptance rate35%
Acceptance to publication20-30 days
ISI- IF1.042
JCR- IF0.24

Indexed In




News and Events


  • Certification for Review
    Acta Scientific certifies the Editors/reviewers for their review done towards the assigned articles of the respective journals.
  • Submission Timeline for Upcoming Issue
    The last date for submission of articles for regular Issues is October 10, 2022.
  • Publication Certificate
    Authors will be issued a "Publication Certificate" as a mark of appreciation for publishing their work.
  • Best Article of the Issue
    The Editors will elect one Best Article after each issue release. The authors of this article will be provided with a certificate of “Best Article of the Issue”.
  • Welcoming Article Submission
    Acta Scientific delightfully welcomes active researchers for submission of articles towards the upcoming issue of respective journals.
  • Contact US