| Literature DB >> 35937750 |
Shreesha Kumar Kodavoor1, Neha Rathi2, Ramamurthy Dandapani2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare and evaluate surgical outcome between tuck in and cauterisation in the management of primary pterygium.Entities:
Keywords: Autograft; cauterization; pterygium management
Year: 2022 PMID: 35937750 PMCID: PMC9351955 DOI: 10.4103/ojo.ojo_277_21
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oman J Ophthalmol ISSN: 0974-620X
Figure 1Preoperative Grade 2 primary pterygium
Figure 2Intraoperative photographs of pterygium excision with Conjunctival Autograft (CAG) tucked inside conjunctiva (a) pterygium excision (b) tuck-in method (c) lid movement done to check graft fixation
Figure 3Intraoperative photos of pterygium excision with CAG fixation with cauterization (a) pterygium excision (b) graft harvestation (c) graft fixation with cauterization
Figure 4Postoperative photographs of the procedure at (a) Day 1 (b) 6 weeks
Demography of the study population (n=114)
| Group 1 ( | Group 2 ( | |
|---|---|---|
| Age | 46.2±9.4 | 43.2±11.3 |
| Male: female | 25:30 | 20:35 |
Comparison of mean duration between the study groups (n=114)
| Parameter | Tuck in | Cauterization |
|---|---|---|
| Duration (min) | 11.17±2.10 | 10.22±1.8 |
Comparison of complications between the study groups (n=114)
| Number of eyes |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Tuck in, | Cauterization, | ||
| Recurrence | 3 (5.35) | 1 (1.72) | 0.2919 |
| Retraction | 28 (50) | 13 (22.4) | 0.002153 |
| Graft edema | 25 (44.64) | 29 (50) | 0.5668 |
| Graft loss | 4 (7.14) | 2 (3.44) | 0.3771 |
| Subconjunctival hemorrhage | 28 (50) | 32 (55.17) | 0.5803 |
| Granuloma | 0 | 1 (1.72) | NA |
NA: Not available
Figure 5Bar diagram showing complications in Group 1 and Group 2