Trial reportScientific reports2026
The efficacy of combined bandage contact lens and nasal margin suture fixation in pterygium patients and its impact on inflammatory cytokines.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of combining bandage contact lens with nasal margin suture fixation in pterygium resection, as well as to observe its effects on the levels of inflammatory cytokines measured in tear samples. This randomized controlled research involved the selection of 80 patients (80 eyes) who underwent limbal conjunctival autograft (LCAG) procedures at Chengfei Hospital between June 2022 and June 2024. Subjects were allocated in a 1:1 ratio to two groups: group 1 utilized bandage contact lens combined with nasal margin suture fixation, while group 2 employed bandage contact lens combined with traditional interrupted suture. Ultimately, 37 patients (37 eyes) in each group successfully completed all scheduled follow-up assessments. The evaluation indicators include operative time, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, thickness of limbal-conjunctival autograft, levels of inflammatory cytokines in tears such as interleukin-6 (IL-6) , tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α) , and transforming growth factor beta1 (TGF-β1) , as well as postoperative complications. Group 1 exhibited a significantly greater reduction in operative time compared to Group 2 (t = - 3.921, P < 0.001). On the 2nd day, 3rd day and 1st week postoperatively, the VAS scores for group 2 were consistently higher than those for group 1 (t = 5.41, 5.07, 4.44; all P < 0.001). On the 2nd day postoperatively, the thickness of limbal-conjunctival autograft in group 1 was found to be greater compared to group 2 (t = 9.78, P < 0.001). However, this trend reversed by the 1st week postoperatively (t = - 5.84, P < 0.001). By the 1st month postoperatively, there was no statistical divergence (t = 0.74, P = 0.461). Furthermore, on the 1st week and 1st month postoperatively, the levels of IL-6 and TNF-α in group 2 were significantly higher than those in group 1 (all P < 0.05). However, no significant differences were observed in the average levels of TGF-β1 between the two groups throughout the observation period (F = 1.56, P = 0.216). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding sub-conjunctival hemorrhage, graft retraction, and graft edema (χ
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.