Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2012 Mar;250(3):375-81.
doi: 10.1007/s00417-011-1820-8. Epub 2011 Sep 21.

Comparison of conjunctival autograft transplantation and amniotic membrane transplantation for pterygium: a meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Comparison of conjunctival autograft transplantation and amniotic membrane transplantation for pterygium: a meta-analysis

Meiyan Li et al. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2012 Mar.

Abstract

Background: Conjunctival autograft transplantation (CAT) and amniotic membrane transplantation (AMT) are two widely used techniques for pterygium treatment. However, previous studies comparing the outcomes of CAT and AMT have generally had small sample sizes and conflicting results. The aim of this report was to evaluate and comment on peer-reviewed literature for evidence of effectiveness and safety of CAT and AMT for management of pterygium.

Methods: Studies comparing outcomes of CAT and AMT for pterygium treatment were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Knowledge, and a search of all references in relevant papers. Two reviewers confirmed study eligibility and extracted data independently, and data were pooled using standard meta-analysis techniques.

Results: Five eligible studies reporting outcomes in 538 eyes were included. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) estimate for recurrence of CAT compared to AMT was 0.30 (95% confidence interval (CI) [0.16, 0.59], p < 0.001) and 0.22 (95%CI [0.02, 2.37], p = 0.214), respectively, for primary and recurrent pterygium. For unacceptable appearance, the pooled HR estimate was 0.33 (95% CI [0.16, 0.66], p = 0.002). There were no statistically significant differences in adverse events (odds ratio (OR) = 0.96, 95% CI [0.46, 1.97], p = 0.901).

Conclusions: Available trials indicate that CAT has lower recurrence risk compared to AMT for primary pterygium treatment, as well as lower risk of unacceptable appearance risk.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Stat Med. 2002 Jun 15;21(11):1539-58 - PubMed
    1. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2006 Feb;244(2):232-6 - PubMed
    1. Indian J Ophthalmol. 1998 Dec;46(4):203-9 - PubMed
    1. Eye (Lond). 2008 Mar;22(3):420-4 - PubMed
    1. Ophthalmology. 1997 Jun;104(6):974-85 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources