Recurrence Rates of Conjunctival Autograft Transplantation With Aminiotic Membrane Transplantation in Primary Pterygium Surgery

Jong Wan Kim; Jaehosng Ahn; Koung Hoon Kook; Hongseok Yang

doi:10.3341/jkos.2011.52.2.163

Journal List > J Korean Ophthalmol Soc > v.52(2) > 1008967

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Kim, Ahn, Kook, and Yang: Recurrence Rates of Conjunctival Autograft Transplantation With Aminiotic Membrane Transplantation in Primary Pterygium Surgery

Original Article

J Korean Ophthalmol Soc 2011;52(2):163-168.

Published online: 7 September 2011

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2011.52.2.163

Recurrence Rates of Conjunctival Autograft Transplantation With Aminiotic Membrane Transplantation in Primary Pterygium Surgery

Jong Wan Kim, MD, Jaehosng Ahn, MD, Koung Hoon Kook, MD, Hongseok Yang, MD

Department of Ophthalmology, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea

Address reprint requests to Hongseok Yang, MD Department of Ophthalmology, Ajou University Hospital San 5, Woncheon-dong, Yeongtong-gu, Suwon 443-729, Korea Tel: 82-31-219-5256, Fax: 82-31-219-5259, E-mail: yhs0816@naver.com

Received 14 June 20105 October 2010 Accepted 13 December 2010

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

To compare postoperative recurrence rates between conjunctival autograft transplantation alone and conjunctival autograft transplantation with amniotic membrane transplantation in primary pterygium surgery.

Methods

The authors conducted a retrospective analysis of 66 eyes from 62 patients who underwent primary pterygium surgery from January 2001 to May 2009. Twenty three eyes underwent conjunctival autograft transplantation alone, 43 eyes underwent conjunctival autograft transplantation with amniotic membrane transplantation.

Results

Recurrence of pterygium was observed in 5 of 23 eyes that received conjunctival autograft transplantation alone. There were 2 cases of recurrence of 43 eyes that received conjunctival autograft transplantation and amniotic membrane transplantation. No major complications such as necrotizing scleritis, sclera ulcer, or corneal perforation were observed in either group after surgery.

Conclusions

The present study showed that receiving both conjunctival autograft transplantation and amniotic membrane transplantation in pterygium surgery has a lower recurrence rate than conjunctival autograft transplantation alone.

Keywords: Amniotic membrane, Pterygium, Recurrence

References

1. Donnenfeld ED, Perry HD, Fromer S, et al. Subconjunctival mitomycin C as adjunctive therapy before pterygium excision. Ophthalmology. 2003; 110:1012–6.

2. Hong SB, Oh SJ, Oh JH. The effects and complications of mitomycin-C for prevention of recurrence after pterygium operation. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 1998; 39:2013–8.

3. Mastropasqua L, Carpineto P, Ciancaglini M, Enrico Gallenga P. Long-term results of intraoperative mitomycin C in the treatment of recurrent pterygium. Br J Ophthalmol. 1996; 80:288–91.

4. Amano S, Motojyma Y, Oshika T, et al. Comparative study of intraoperative mitomycin C and beta irradiation in pterygium surgery. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000; 84:618–21.

5. Lee SH, Jeong HJ. Immune reactions in pterygium. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 1987; 28:927–33.

6. Jaros PA, DeLuise VP. Pingueculae and pterygia. Surv Ophthalmol. 1988; 33:41–9.

7. Kim CH, Lee JK, Park DJ. Recurrence rates of amniotic membrane transplantation, conjunctival autograft and conjunctivolimbal autograft in primary pterygium. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2009; 50:1780–8.

8. Manning CA, Kloess PM, Diaz MD, Yee RW. Intraoperative mitomycin in primary pterygium excision. A prospective, randomized trial. Ophthalmology. 1997; 104:844–8.

9. Allan BD, Short P, Crawford GJ, et al. Pterygium excision with conjunctival autografting: an effective and safe technique. Br J Ophthalmol. 1993; 77:698–701.

10. Cho JW, Chung SH, Seo KY, Kim EK. Conjunctival mini-flap technique and conjunctival autotransplantation in pterygium surgery. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2005; 46:1471–7.

11. Prabhasawat P, Barton K, Burkett G, Tseng SC. Comparison of conjunctival autografts, amniotic membrane grafts, and primary closure for pterygium excision. Ophthalmology. 1997; 104:974–85.

12. Tan DT, Chee SP, Dear KB, Lim AS. Effect of pterygium morphology on pterygium recurrence in a controlled trial comparing conjunctival autografting with bare sclera excision. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997; 115:1235–40.

13. Mutlu FM, Sobaci G, Tatar T, Yildirim E. A comparative study of recurrent pterygium surgery: limbal conjunctival autograft transplantation versus mitomycin C with conjunctival flap. Ophthalmology. 1999; 106:817–21.

14. Barraquer JI, Binder PS, Buxton JN. Etiology and treatment of pterygium; Symposium on Medical and Surgical Diseases of the Cornea. Transactions of the New Orleans Academy of Ophthalmology. St. Louis: Mosby;1980. p. 167–78.

15. Ozer A, Yildirim N, Erol N, Yurdakul S. Long-term results of bare sclera, limbal-conjunctival autograft and amniotic membrane graft techniques in primary pterygium excisions. Ophthalmologica. 2009; 223:269–73.

16. Kenyon KR, Tseng SC. Limbal autograft transplantation for ocular surface disorders. Ophthalmology. 1989; 96:709–22.

17. van Herendael BJ, Oberti C, Brosens I. Microanatomy of the human amniotic membrane. A light microscopic, transmission, and scanning electron microscopic study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1978; 131:872–80.

18. Terranova VP, Lyall RM. Chemotaxis of human gingival epithelial cells to laminin. A mechanism for epithelial cell apical migration. J Periodontol. 1986; 57:311–7.

19. Sonnenberg A, Calafat J, Janssen H, et al. Integrin alpha 6/beta 4 complex is located in hemidesmosomes, suggesting a major role in epidermal cell-basement membrane adhesion. J Cell Biol. 1991; 113:907–17.

20. Streuli CH, Bailey N, Bissel MJ. Control of mammary epithelial differentiation: basement membrane induces tissue-specific gene expression in the absence of cell-cell interaction and morphological polarity. J Cell Biol. 1991; 115:1383–95.

21. Na BK, Hwang JH, Kim JC, et al. Analysis of human amniotic membrane components as proteinase inhibitors for development of therapeutic agent for recalcitrant keratitis. Placenta. 1999; 20:453–66.

22. Solomon A, Pires RT, Tseng SC. Amniotic membrane transplantation after extensive removal of primary and recurrent pterygia. Ophthalmology. 2001; 108:449–60.

Figure 1.

Surgical technique of conjunctival autograft transplantation. (A) Removal of pterygium from the cornea with a Beaver blade. (B) Tenon's capsule and subconjunctival fibrovascular tissue are undermined and excised extensively with a pair of spring scissors. (C) Marked the donor conjunctiva with gentian violet made to measure the size of the conjunctival defect. (D) Conjunctival graft is attached to the conjunctival edges and episclera with interrupted 10-0 nylon sutures.

Figure 2.

Surgical technique of amniotic membrane transplantation. Amniotic membrane is cut a proper-sized graft, which will cover the conjunctival transplantation area and corneal epithelial defect area. The membrane is placed over the epithelial side on top. Pinch together the membrane and conjunctiva, interrupted suture is done with 10-0 nylon.

Table 1.

Characteristics of patients

	Control group^† (23 eyes)	Study group^‡ (43 eyes)	p-value
Age (yr, Mean ± SD^∗)	46.3 ± 13.7	51.3 ± 10.8	0.345^§
Sex (Male:Female)	9:14	19:24	0.796^∏
Followup period (months, Mean ± SD^∗)	11.7 ± 24.2	12.4 ± 16.8	0.891^§
Preoperative grading (T2:T3)	8:12 (3 eyes were unrecorded)	12:22 (9 eyes were unrecorded)	0.735^∏

^∗ SD=standard deviation;

^† Control group =conjunctival autograft transplantation group;

^‡ Study group =conjunctival autograft transplantation;

^† Amniotic membrane transplantation group;

^§ Measured by chi-square test;

^∏ Measured by independent t-test.

Table 2.

Differences between recurred cases and non-recurred cases in control group^†

	Recurred cases (5 eyes)	Non-recurred cases (18 eyes)	p-value
Age (yr, Mean ± SD^∗)	48.8 ± 12.1	45.6 ± 14.5	0.658^‡
Sex (Male:Female)	1:4	8:10	0.611^§
Preoperative grading (T2:T3)	2:3	6:9 (3 eyes were unrecorded)	0.693^§

^∗ SD = standard deviation;

^† Control group = conjunctival autograft transplantation group;

^‡ Measured by independent t-test;

^§ Measured by chi-square test.

Table 3.

Differences between recurred cases and non-recurred cases in study group^†

	Recurred cases (2 eyes)	Non-recurred cases (41 eyes)	p-value
Age (yr, Mean ± SD^∗)	70.0 ± 1.4	50.4 ± 10.2	0.011^‡
Sex (Male:Female)	0:2	19:22	0.495^§
Preoperative grading (T2:T3)	0:2	12:20 (9 eyes were unrecorded)	0.512^§

SD = standard deviation;

^† Study group = conjunctival autograft transplantation;

^† Amniotic membrane transplantation group;

^‡ Measured by ndependent t-test;

^§ Measured by chi-square test.

TOOLS

Similar articles