Aim: To compare the post-operative inflammation, surgical time and complications in conjunctival autografting with oozed autologous blood versus sutures in primary pterygium surgery. Study Design: Prospective interventional study. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Ophthalmology, CIMS, Bilaspur (C.G), India. (Jan 2017-May 2018). Methodology: 80 eyes of 80 patients (25 to 75 years) presented with primary pterygium up to grade 3 were included in this prospective interventional study presented in eye OPD, CIMS, Bilaspur (CG). All the procedures and post-operative evaluation was done by the same surgeon. All the patients were divided into two groups on alternate basis. 40 patients received conjunctival autografting with oozed autologous blood (CAGb) and 40 patients received sutures (CAGs). These two groups were then compared for post-operative inflammation, surgical time and complications (day 1, day 5, 2 weeks, 1 month and 3 month). Result: Total 80 patients were evaluated after surgery. Progressive pterygium was observed in more than 50% cases in both groups. Post-operative inflammation and discomfort was significantly lower in CAGb group compared to CAGs group (P<.001). Mean surgical time was also significantly less in CAGb group (11.6±2 min) compared to CAGs group (21.6±3min) (P<.001). In CAGb group 5% patients had graft displacement while none in CAGs group. Granuloma formation was higher in CAGs group (12.5%) compared to CAGb group (7.5%). Subgraft haemorrhage was 10% in CAGb and 17.5% in CAGs group. Dellen formation was seen in 3 patients in CAGb and 4 patients in CAGs. Recurrence rate was higher in suture group (5/40 in CAGs vs 1/40 in CAGb). Conclusion: Our study concludes that placement of conjunctival autograft with oozed autologous blood as adhesive after pterygium excision is an effective, less inflammatory and less time consuming approach, with significantly lower rates of post-operative complications. This can be used as a better alternative to suture technique.
Purpose:Resections and plications tighten recti although the latter are less traumatic, potentially reversible, quicker, and vascularity preserving. To compare inflammation, scarring, and alignment in horizontal strabismus, operated uniocularly by either resections or plications (with recessions): recession and resection (R&R) or recession and plication (R&P) groups. This was a prospective, patient and assessor blind, randomized trial.Methods:All consenting strabismus patients qualifying for the first-time uniocular horizontal rectus surgeries underwent detailed ocular examination and were randomized into standard R&R or R&P groups. For the latter, we folded the tendon-muscle strap the desired amount using 6-0 polyglactin, suturing it to its insertion, entailing no disinsertion. We compared the groups for inflammatory grades (individually for congestion, chemosis, discharge, foreign-body sensation, and drop intolerance and aggregated to a total inflammatory score (TIS), scar visibility (SV) at 1 m, and successful alignment (≤10 prism diopter of orthotropia). We used Mann–Whitney and Fisher's exact tests, with significance at P ≤ 0.05.Results:We randomized 40 patients: 22 to R&R and 18 to R&P. The groups were comparable in age, strabismus onset and duration, and strabismus amount. The inflammatory scores, both individual and TIS, were comparable at all time-points: all P > 0.05. SV proportions were not significantly different: 16/22 in R&R versus 9/18 in R&P; P = 0.19. There were no significant differences in success rates: 14/22 versus 10/18, P = 0.74.Conclusion:Our study shows that plication is similarly effective as resection, when combined with recession in horizontal strabismus, and should be resorted to more frequently.
Aim: To compare the recurrence rate of conjunctival rhinosporidiosis mass excision, with and without cauterization of base. Study Design: Prospective randomized clinical trial. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Ophthalmology, CIMS, Bilaspur (C.G), India. (Feb 2018-Dec 2019) Methodology: Twenty patients (5-25years) who presented with conjunctival mass clinically diagnosed as ocular rhinosporidiosis were included in this study. Patients were recruited from OPD ophthalmology CIMS, Bilaspur (C.G). Patients were divided on alternate basis into two groups. Each group had 10 patients. Group1 included excisions with cauterization of base with wet field cautery and group 2 included excisions without cautery. All the procedures and post-operative evaluation were done by the same surgeon. These two groups were compared for recurrence of mass at the same site and other sites. Post-operative evaluation was done at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months and 6 months. Results: Patients’ age ranged between 5-15 years were more in both groups. There were more males than females and majority of them lived in rural areas where pond water was the only accessible portable water. Lower lid palpebral conjunctiva was more involved. The mean duration of lesion was similar in both groups. All the patients were examined at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months and 6 months post-operatively, to check for recurrence at the same site by the same surgeon. The ear, nose and throat was examined by an otolaryngologist. No recurrence was found after 6 months of the procedure at ocular and extra-ocular sites. Conclusion: Our study concludes that in cases of rhinosporidiosis mass of palpebral conjunctiva, total excision of mass without cauterization of base is as effective as with cauterization of base.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.