ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2024
Comparison of the effects of 0.05% topical cyclosporine A versus 0.1% topical cyclosporine A on recurrence and clinical parameters following pterygium surgery.
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2024. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: To compare the efficacy of topical 0.05% cyclosporine A (CsA) and 0.1% topical cyclosporine A (CsA) over a 6-month period following pterygium surgery, specifically evaluating their effects on postoperative recurrence and clinical parameters. Material and methods: This clinical study enrolled 245 patients with pterygium who underwent surgery using the conjunctival autograft technique with mitomycin C (MMC) were enrolled. Participants were divided into three groups: Group 1 (0.05% CsA) (n = 80), Group 2 (0.1% CsA) (n = 80), and a control group (n = 85). They were examined at postoperative first day, first week, first month and sixth month. The examination included best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), presence of inflammation, and ptergium recurrence, all of which were compared across the groups. Results: The mean age of the patients was 63.22 ± 9.39 years, with 53.3% male and 46.7% female. The three groups were similar in terms of demographic characteristics and pterygium size. Inflammation in surgical area significantly regressed in all groups at 6 months postoperatively (p < 0.05). Inflammation in the first and sixth months was not different between the groups (p = 0.118, p = 0.580, and p = 0.435, respectively). The recurrence rate was not different between groups (p = 0.890). There was no statistically significant difference between groups regarding IOP (p = 0.818). A significant increase in BCVA after surgery was observed in three groups compared to preoperative levels (p < 0.05). Conclusion: This study showed that there was no difference between the efficacy of 6 month topical 0.05% CsA and 0.1% CsA application after pterygium surgery with the conjunctival autograft technique with MMC on postoperative outcomes. Including postoperative recurrence, IOP changes, BCVA changes and surgical area inflammation.
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.