ArticleCureus2025
Evaluation of Refractive Status Changes Following Pterygium Surgery With the Bare Sclera Technique Versus Conjunctival Autografting in a Tertiary Eye Care Centre in Kolkata: A Prospective Comparative Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 Therapeutic options for pterygium are primarily surgical. Several techniques are available for the surgical excision of pterygium. This study aims to compare the refractive status change following pterygium surgery between the bare sclera and the limbal conjunctival autograft technique. Methods The study subjects included 110 patients (110 eyes) with primary nasal pterygium who underwent surgery. After a full preoperative assessment, all patients were randomly allocated to either group A (bare sclera technique, BST) or group B (limbal conjunctival autograft technique, LCAT). All patients were assessed for visual acuity in LogMAR score, refraction in diopters (D), and keratometry values in diopters (D) at the first OPD visit and postoperatively after two weeks, four weeks, and 12 weeks. Quantitative data were expressed as means and standard deviations, while qualitative data were expressed in frequencies and percentages. To compare the variables, paired and unpaired t-tests were used. A p< 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Result The preoperative mean visual acuity was improved from LogMAR score 0.37±0.15 to LogMAR score 0.15±0.10 with a p-value <0.001 and from LogMAR score 0.37±0.17 to LogMAR score 0.08±0.09 with a p-value <0.001 after 12 weeks of surgery in the BST and the LCAT, respectively. The preoperative mean astigmatism was reduced from 2.10±0.84 D to 1.30±0.56 D (p <0.001) and from 2.08±0.96 D to 0.70±0.40 D (p <0.001) after 12 weeks of surgery in the BST and LCAT, respectively. The improvement in mean visual acuity was better in the LCAT than in the BST, and the difference between the groups was statistically significant (p <0.001) after 12 weeks of surgery. The reduction in post-operative mean astigmatism was greater in the LCAT than in the BST, and the difference between the groups was statistically significant (p < 0.001) after 12 weeks of surgery. The difference in keratometry values after 12 weeks of surgery between the two groups was also found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05). Conclusion Pterygium excision resulted in better improvement in the limbal conjunctival autograft technique than the bare sclera technique in terms of visual acuity, astigmatism, and keratometry values.
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.