SynthesisScientific reports2026
Efficacy of sutureless and glue-free conjunctival autograft compared with sutured conjunctival autograft in pterygium surgery: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study compared sutureless and glue-free conjunctival autograft (SGC) with sutured conjunctival autograft (control) in pterygium surgery in terms of key outcome measures, including recurrence rate, complication rate, and surgical duration, to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SGC. A comprehensive search of five databases (PubMed, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, and China Science and Technology Journal Database) was conducted to identify relevant studies. Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed using relative risk (RR), and continuous outcomes were analyzed using mean difference (MD). The 95% confidence intervals (CIs) provided a measure of the precision of the estimates. The study included a total of 1,233 eyes from 11 studies. The pooled estimates for recurrence rate (RR = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.42-1.01) and overall complication rate (RR = 1.24; 95% CI, 0.68-2.25) revealed no statistically significant differences between SGC and control groups. However, the pooled estimates for graft dehiscence (RR = 4.73; 95% CI, 1.29-17.28) and graft retraction (RR = 3.09; 95% CI, 1.56-6.15) indicated higher incidences of these complications in the SGC group. Furthermore, the analysis of surgical duration revealed a statistically significant reduction in surgical duration in the SGC group (MD= - 12.79; 95% CI, - 18.04 to - 7.53). This meta-analysis demonstrates that, compared with the control group, SGC can significantly shorten surgical duration without increasing the recurrence rate in the treatment of pterygium, although it is associated with higher rates of graft dehiscence and graft retraction.
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.