ArticleOman journal of ophthalmology
Tuck in versus cauterisation of graft edge in pterygium management: A comparative retrospective interventional analysis.
Article in Oman journal of ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- PentagonalInternational journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare and evaluate surgical outcome between tuck in and cauterisation in the management of primary pterygium. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwo groups of 56 eyes and 58 eyes with primary pterygium underwent pterygium excision with conjunctival autograft fixation by tucking in alone (Group 1) and with cauterization (Group 2), respectively. A retrospective comparative analysis was done between the two groups.
resultsThis study included a total of 114 eyes in the final analysis. The recurrence was noted in 3 eyes in Group 1 (5.35%), whereas only 1 eye (1.72%) in Group 2. Other complications included graft edema in 25 eyes (44.64%), in Group 1 and 29 eyes (50%) in Group 2, subconjunctival hemorrhage seen in 28 eyes (50%) in Group 1 and 32 eyes (55.17%) in Group 2, graft retraction observed in 28 eyes (50%) in Group 1 and 13 eyes (22.4%) in Group 2, granuloma formation was seen only in one patient (1.72%) in Group 2, graft loss was observed in four patients (7.14%) in Group 1 and 2 patients (3.44%) in Group 2.
conclusionGraft fixation in pterygium surgery using low-cost procedures with tuck in or cauterization proves to be tolerable, safe and successful method. An additional step of fixing the graft to the cut conjunctival margin using bipolar cautery proves to be safer.
Indexed as
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.