PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of umbilical cord serum (UCS) with amniotic membrane transplantation (AMT) in cases of acute ocular chemical burns. METHODS: In a retrospective, interventional, comparative case series, 55 eyes with grades III, IV and V chemical burns (Dua's classification) who presented within 3 weeks of injury were evaluated. Patients were treated with conventional medical (CM group, 20 eyes) management alone or combined with either UCS (UCS group, 17 eyes) or AMT (AMT group, 18 eyes). The parameters evaluated were time to epithelialisation, epithelial defect diameter, epithelial defect area, corneal clarity, tear break-up time (TBUT), Schirmer test and best-corrected vision. RESULTS: UCS and AMT groups showed early epithelialisation as compared with the CM group (Kaplan-Meier analysis=0.01). Mean time for healing of epithelial defect was 57.7±29.3, 27.4±19.0, 41.1±28.9 days in the CM, UCS and AMT groups, respectively (p=0.02). Mean TBUT at the last follow-up was 8.6±0.7, 10.3±1.1, 9.4±1.2 s in the CM, UCS and AMT groups, respectively (p=0.02). The mean Schirmer value at the last follow-up was 13.7±1.0, 16.9±3.0 and 13.2±1.5 mm in the CM, UCS and AMT groups, respectively (p=0.01). The visual outcomes and the occurrence of corneal vascularisation, symblepheron, ectropion and entropion were comparable in between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that the UCS therapy may be a better alternative to AMT in acute moderate to severe (grades III, IV and V) ocular chemical burns, as it avoids surgical manoeuvre in already inflamed eyes. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of umbilical cord serum (UCS) with amniotic membrane transplantation (AMT) in cases of acute ocular chemical burns. METHODS: In a retrospective, interventional, comparative case series, 55 eyes with grades III, IV and V chemical burns (Dua's classification) who presented within 3 weeks of injury were evaluated. Patients were treated with conventional medical (CM group, 20 eyes) management alone or combined with either UCS (UCS group, 17 eyes) or AMT (AMT group, 18 eyes). The parameters evaluated were time to epithelialisation, epithelial defect diameter, epithelial defect area, corneal clarity, tear break-up time (TBUT), Schirmer test and best-corrected vision. RESULTS: UCS and AMT groups showed early epithelialisation as compared with the CM group (Kaplan-Meier analysis=0.01). Mean time for healing of epithelial defect was 57.7±29.3, 27.4±19.0, 41.1±28.9 days in the CM, UCS and AMT groups, respectively (p=0.02). Mean TBUT at the last follow-up was 8.6±0.7, 10.3±1.1, 9.4±1.2 s in the CM, UCS and AMT groups, respectively (p=0.02). The mean Schirmer value at the last follow-up was 13.7±1.0, 16.9±3.0 and 13.2±1.5 mm in the CM, UCS and AMT groups, respectively (p=0.01). The visual outcomes and the occurrence of corneal vascularisation, symblepheron, ectropion and entropion were comparable in between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that the UCS therapy may be a better alternative to AMT in acute moderate to severe (grades III, IV and V) ocular chemical burns, as it avoids surgical manoeuvre in already inflamed eyes. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cornea; Treatment Medical; Treatment Surgery