Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42257741›Full record

Trial reportInternational ophthalmology2026

A randomized controlled trial comparing limbal-conjunctival autograft with conjunctival autograft in recurrent pterygium surgery with intraoperative application of 0.02% mitomycin C.

Wenyan Peng, Chunxiao Wang, Xueqin Gong, Zhewen Zheng, Kang Yu, Tao Zhou, Jiakai Pi, Shiyou Zhou

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in International ophthalmology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

Wenyan Peng *State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, 510060, China.
Chunxiao Wang *State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, 510060, China.
Xueqin GongState Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, 510060, China.
Zhewen ZhengEye Institute of Shandong First Medical University, Qingdao Eye Hospital of Shandong First Medical University, Qingdao, China.
Kang YuDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Second People's Hospital of Foshan, Foshan, Guangdong, China.
Tao ZhouDepartment of Ophthalmology, The First People's Hospital of Guiyang, Guiyang, 550002, China.
Jiakai PiThe First Medical College, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510060, China.
Shiyou ZhouState Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, 510060, China. zhoushiy@mail.sysu.edu.cn.

Funding

Guangzhou Municipal Science and Technology Planning Project 202201020502Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province, China 2022A1515011140
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare the outcomes of conjunctival graft (CAG) versus limbal-conjunctival autograft (LCAG) in preventing recurrence after surgery for recurrent pterygium with intraoperative application of 0.02% mitomycin C(MMC).

methodsThis prospective randomized controlled trial included one hundred thirty-two participants with recurrent pterygium who underwent either LCAG or CAG following pterygium excision, with intraoperative application of 0.02% MMC for 5 min (66 eyes in each group). Patients were followed for 12 months. The primary outcomes were recurrence and postoperative complications.

resultsA total of 126 patients completed the 12-month follow-up, including 63 eyes in the LCAG group and 63 eyes in the CAG group. Recurrence occurred in 6 eyes (9.52%) in the LCAG group and 3 eyes (4.76%) in the CAG group. The absolute risk difference was - 4.76% (95% CI, - 13.1-3.6%), the relative risk was 0.50 (95% CI, 0.13-1.92), and the odds ratio was 0.48 (95% CI, 0.11-1.99), with no statistically significant difference between groups (χ

conclusionsIn this prospective randomized superiority trial,no statistically significant difference was detected in recurrence rates of recurrent pterygium after surgery with mitomycin C application between the LCAG and CAG groups during the 12-month follow-up period. Localized donor-site pannus formation was seen in some eyes with LCAG.

Indexed as

ConjunctivaLimbal Stem CellsMitomycinOphthalmologic Surgical ProceduresPterygiumAdultAgedAlkylating AgentsAutograftsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIntraoperative CareMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesAlkylating AgentsMitomycinConjunctival autograftLimbal conjunctival graftMitomycin CRandomized controlled trialRecurrent pterygium

Identifiers

PMID42257741

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.