ArticleJournal of ophthalmology2021
Evaluation of Conjunctival Autografting Augmented with Mitomycin C Application
Article in Journal of ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ocular surface reconstruction using collagen matrix implant in cases of moderate to severe symblepharon: A pilot study.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Applications of Mitomycin C in Cornea and External Disease.Turkish journal of ophthalmology · 2023Review
- Recurrent Pterygium: A Review.Journal of current ophthalmologyReview
- Use of Mitomycin C in Ophthalmic Surgery.Journal of current ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the safety and efficacy of augmenting conjunctival autografting with intraoperative mitomycin C (MMC) application MATERIALS AND
methodsThis prospective randomised study included 63 eyes of 63 patients, with recurrent nasal pterygium, who presented to the outpatient clinic of Menoufia University Hospital in Shebin El Kom and Manshiet Soltan from January 2016 to December 2019. Patients were randomly enrolled into two groups. Group A included 32 eyes of 32 patients who underwent conjunctival autografting augmented with the topical application of MMC (0.2 mg/mL), and group B included 31 eyes of 31 patients who underwent conjunctival autografting augmented with Ologen implantation. All the patients underwent follow-up examinations for a period of 24 months. During each visit, a complete ophthalmic examination was performed. Pterygium regrowth of 1 mm or more, over the cornea, was considered a recurrence.
resultsIn the MMC group, no recurrence was reported during the 24-month follow-up period. In the Ologen implantation group, recurrence was reported in 2 (8%) eyes. The time interval from surgery to recurrence was 5 months in one case and 8 months in the other. No other serious postoperative complications were reported, and there was no statistically significant difference between the groups in this regard.
conclusionOlogen implantation with conjunctival autografting shows promising results in the surgical management of recurrent pterygium with mild non-vision-threatening postoperative complications comparable to that of MMC application with conjunctival autografting. Registration number:
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.