Ologen Implantation versus Conjunctival Autograft Transplantation for Treatment of Pterygium

Purpose. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Ologen implantation versus conjunctival autograft transplantation for primary pterygium. Methods. A retrospective case-series analysis. Thirty-one eyes of 29 patients were included in the Ologen group and 42 eyes of 35 patients in the autograft gr...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Xiuping Chen, Fei Yuan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2018-01-01
Series:Journal of Ophthalmology
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/1617520
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832568109728268288
author Xiuping Chen
Fei Yuan
author_facet Xiuping Chen
Fei Yuan
author_sort Xiuping Chen
collection DOAJ
description Purpose. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Ologen implantation versus conjunctival autograft transplantation for primary pterygium. Methods. A retrospective case-series analysis. Thirty-one eyes of 29 patients were included in the Ologen group and 42 eyes of 35 patients in the autograft group. The patients were followed up for 1 year and evaluated for slit-lamp biomicroscopy, intraocular pressure, and adverse events. Recurrence rate, complications, and final appearance of the cases were evaluated prospectively. Result. At 1 year after operation, 2 eyes recurred (6.5%) in the Ologen group and 4 eyes recurred (9.52%) in the autograft group. There was no statistically significant difference between both groups (P=0.157, χ2 = 3.781). There was no occurrence of serious complications. Two eyes among the 31 eyes of the Ologen group were conjunctivitis; the incidence of complications was 6.45% (2 eyes). There was conjunctivitis in 3 eyes of the autograft group, 1 eye complicated with symblepharon, and 1 eye with conjunctival granuloma; the incidence of complications was 11.90% (5 eyes), and there was no statistically significant difference between both groups (P=0.094). The conjuntiva was less vascular and inflamed at 1 month postoperatively in the Ologen group than in the autograft group. Conclusions. Ologen transplantation was technically easier, provided short operative time compared with conjunctival autograft transplantation, and preserved healthy conjunctiva with less complication and less recurrence; it may be a new, safe, and effective alternative for improving the short-term success rate of primary surgery.
format Article
id doaj-art-d9eaf07e7dd14b8ea609933cee3806f2
institution Kabale University
issn 2090-004X
2090-0058
language English
publishDate 2018-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Journal of Ophthalmology
spelling doaj-art-d9eaf07e7dd14b8ea609933cee3806f22025-02-03T00:59:47ZengWileyJournal of Ophthalmology2090-004X2090-00582018-01-01201810.1155/2018/16175201617520Ologen Implantation versus Conjunctival Autograft Transplantation for Treatment of PterygiumXiuping Chen0Fei Yuan1Department of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaPurpose. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Ologen implantation versus conjunctival autograft transplantation for primary pterygium. Methods. A retrospective case-series analysis. Thirty-one eyes of 29 patients were included in the Ologen group and 42 eyes of 35 patients in the autograft group. The patients were followed up for 1 year and evaluated for slit-lamp biomicroscopy, intraocular pressure, and adverse events. Recurrence rate, complications, and final appearance of the cases were evaluated prospectively. Result. At 1 year after operation, 2 eyes recurred (6.5%) in the Ologen group and 4 eyes recurred (9.52%) in the autograft group. There was no statistically significant difference between both groups (P=0.157, χ2 = 3.781). There was no occurrence of serious complications. Two eyes among the 31 eyes of the Ologen group were conjunctivitis; the incidence of complications was 6.45% (2 eyes). There was conjunctivitis in 3 eyes of the autograft group, 1 eye complicated with symblepharon, and 1 eye with conjunctival granuloma; the incidence of complications was 11.90% (5 eyes), and there was no statistically significant difference between both groups (P=0.094). The conjuntiva was less vascular and inflamed at 1 month postoperatively in the Ologen group than in the autograft group. Conclusions. Ologen transplantation was technically easier, provided short operative time compared with conjunctival autograft transplantation, and preserved healthy conjunctiva with less complication and less recurrence; it may be a new, safe, and effective alternative for improving the short-term success rate of primary surgery.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/1617520
spellingShingle Xiuping Chen
Fei Yuan
Ologen Implantation versus Conjunctival Autograft Transplantation for Treatment of Pterygium
Journal of Ophthalmology
title Ologen Implantation versus Conjunctival Autograft Transplantation for Treatment of Pterygium
title_full Ologen Implantation versus Conjunctival Autograft Transplantation for Treatment of Pterygium
title_fullStr Ologen Implantation versus Conjunctival Autograft Transplantation for Treatment of Pterygium
title_full_unstemmed Ologen Implantation versus Conjunctival Autograft Transplantation for Treatment of Pterygium
title_short Ologen Implantation versus Conjunctival Autograft Transplantation for Treatment of Pterygium
title_sort ologen implantation versus conjunctival autograft transplantation for treatment of pterygium
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/1617520
work_keys_str_mv AT xiupingchen ologenimplantationversusconjunctivalautografttransplantationfortreatmentofpterygium
AT feiyuan ologenimplantationversusconjunctivalautografttransplantationfortreatmentofpterygium