Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36961661›Full record

ReviewOphthalmology and therapy2023

Conjunctival and Limbal Conjunctival Autograft vs. Amniotic Membrane Graft in Primary Pterygium Surgery: A 30-Year Comprehensive Review.

Benoît Paganelli, Marwan Sahyoun, Eric Gabison

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. PentagonalInternational journal of ophthalmology · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Therapeutic Potential of Graphene Quantum Dots on Pterygium Cells.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Genetic evidence implicating circulating lipids and lipid drug targets in pterygium.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Benoît PaganelliFondation Adolphe de Rothschild Hospital, 47Bis rue Manin, 75019, Paris, France.
Marwan SahyounHorus Pharma, 06700, Saint-Laurent-du-Var, France.
Eric GabisonFondation Adolphe de Rothschild Hospital, 47Bis rue Manin, 75019, Paris, France. egabison@for.paris.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe purpose of this study is to compare the "real-life" effectiveness of amniotic membrane graft (AMG) and conjunctival (CAT) or limbal conjunctival (LCA) autograft in the management of primary pterygium.

methodsHuman-based studies on primary pterygium surgery that were published between 1993 and 2022 with at least 3 months of follow-up were identified, and only those that were retrospective were included. The global recurrence rate of pterygium was assessed for each surgical technique separately. Specific recurrence rates taking into consideration the fixation technique (glue versus sutures) were also measured.

results35 real-life retrospective subgroups comprising a total of 3747 eyes were included in the final review. The mean global recurrence rates for CAT, LCA and AMG were 7.61%, 5.50% and 9.0%, respectively. Recurrences were less common for patients who received fibrin glue (5.92%, 2.56% and 3.60%) than for those who received sutures (8.99%, 6.03% and 23.0%) for the three groups, respectively. Surgical techniques combining CAT or LCA with AMG yielded an even lower global recurrence rate (1.83%).

conclusionAMG seems like a reasonable option that could be considered in primary pterygium surgery, especially when glued to the underlying sclera. Combining AMG with other treatment modalities such as CAT or LCA seems to offer an interesting alternative in terms of recurrence.

Indexed as

Amniotic membraneConjunctival autograftLimbal conjunctival autograftPrimary pterygiumReal-lifeRecurrenceReview

Identifiers

PMID36961661
PMCPMC10164200

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.