WANG Run, ZHAO Lian, MA Ke, SHI Jingdi. Effect of limbal stem cell transplantation versus amniotic membrane transplantation in treating pterygium[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2021, 25(12): 5-8. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.20210381
Citation: WANG Run, ZHAO Lian, MA Ke, SHI Jingdi. Effect of limbal stem cell transplantation versus amniotic membrane transplantation in treating pterygium[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2021, 25(12): 5-8. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.20210381

Effect of limbal stem cell transplantation versus amniotic membrane transplantation in treating pterygium

More Information
  • Received Date: January 19, 2021
  • Available Online: July 04, 2021
  • Published Date: June 27, 2021
  •   Objective  To compare the effect of amniotic membrane transplantation and limbal stem cell transplantation on the refractive status, cosmetic effect and safety for patients with pterygium.
      Methods  A total of 84 patients with pterygium were selected as research subjects. They were divided into control group (42 cases, pterygium surgery combined with limbal stem cell transplantation) and observation group (42 cases, pterygium combined with amniotic membrane transplantation) using random number table method. The visual acuity and refractive power of the two groups before and after the operation were compared, and the wound healing time, postoperative complications and cosmetic effects of the two groups were compared.
      Results  The visual acuity at 1 week and 1 month after operation of the two groups was significantly higher than preoperation, and the refractive power was significantly decreased (P < 0.05). There were no significant changes in visual acuity and refractive power at 1 month after operation when compared with 1 week after operation (P>0.05). There were no significant differences in visual acuity and refractive power between the two groups before operation, 1 week after operation and 1 month after operation (P>0.05). The wound healing time of the observation group was prolonged comparing with the control group (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the total complication rate between the two groups (P>0.05). The recurrence rate of the study group was significantly higher comparing with the control group (P < 0.05).
      Conclusion  Membrane transplantation and limbal autologous stem cell transplantation are both safe and effective treatment for pterygium resection. They can both promote vision recovery and improve corneal refractive status. However, limbal autologous stem cell transplantation can promote wound healing and reduce the recurrence rate after pterygium surgery and obtain satisfactory cosmetic results.
  • [1]
    CHU W K, CHOI H L, BHAT A K, et al. Pterygium: new insights[J]. Eye: Lond, 2020, 34(6): 1047-1050. doi: 10.1038/s41433-020-0786-3
    [2]
    NUZZI R, TRIDICO F. How to minimize pterygium recurrence rates: clinical perspectives[J]. Clin Ophthalmol, 2018, 12: 2347-2362. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S186543
    [3]
    SAGLIK A, KOYUNCU I, GONEL A, et al. Metabolomics analysis in pterygium tissue[J]. Int Ophthalmol, 2019, 39(10): 2325-2333. doi: 10.1007/s10792-018-01069-2
    [4]
    王孟妮, 王平, 徐玲娟, 等. 自体角膜缘干细胞移植联合羊膜移植治疗角膜缘干细胞失代偿[J]. 华中科技大学学报: 医学版, 2018, 47(3): 344-348. doi: 10.3870/j.issn.1672-0741.2018.03.019
    [5]
    海鸥, 刘芳, 李鹏. 不同翼状胬肉切除术式对患者术后泪膜功能的影响[J]. 国际眼科杂志, 2019, 19(8): 1439-1441. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GJYK201908052.htm
    [6]
    岳章显, 刘汉珍. 角膜缘干细胞移植联合丝裂霉素C及羊膜移植治疗复发性翼状胬肉的美学效果[J]. 中国美容医学, 2018, 27(9): 77-79. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-MRYX201809030.htm
    [7]
    REZVAN F, KHABAZKHOOB M, HOOSHMAND E, et al. Prevalence and risk factors of pterygium: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Surv Ophthalmol, 2018, 63(5): 719-735. doi: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2018.03.001
    [8]
    WANZELER A C V, BARBOSA I A F, DUARTE B, et al. Mechanisms and biomarker candidates in pterygium development[J]. Arq Bras Oftalmol, 2019, 82(6): 528-536. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31576927
    [9]
    LIN Y H, SUN C C, YEUNG L, et al. Epidemiologic study of pterygium in Taiwan[J]. Jpn J Ophthalmol, 2019, 63(4): 297-303. doi: 10.1007/s10384-019-00670-x
    [10]
    YIN J, JURKUNAS U. Limbal stem cell transplantation and complications[J]. Semin Ophthalmol, 2018, 33(1): 134-141. doi: 10.1080/08820538.2017.1353834
    [11]
    BALLIOS B G, WEISBROD M, CHAN C C, et al. Systemic immunosuppression in limbal stem cell transplantation: best practices and future challenges[J]. Can J Ophthalmol, 2018, 53(4): 314-323. doi: 10.1016/j.jcjo.2017.10.040
    [12]
    CABRAL J V, JACKSON C J, UTHEIM T P, et al. Ex vivo cultivated oral mucosal epithelial cell transplantation for limbal stem cell deficiency: a review[J]. Stem Cell Res Ther, 2020, 11(1): 301-305. doi: 10.1186/s13287-020-01783-8
    [13]
    KASSEM R R, EL-MOFTY R M A M. Amniotic membrane transplantation in strabismus surgery[J]. Curr Eye Res, 2019, 44(5): 451-464. doi: 10.1080/02713683.2018.1562555
    [14]
    KOGAN S, SOOD A, GRANICK M S. Amniotic membrane adjuncts and clinical applications in wound healing: a review of the literature[J]. Wounds, 2018, 30(6): 168-173. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30059334
  • Related Articles

    [1]ZHU Rong, XIONG Zhaohui, CHEN Yunliang, LI Mengxin, WANG Haiquan. Effect of midazolam and dexmedetomidine in patients with septic shock during mechanical ventilation[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2023, 27(11): 124-127. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.20223579
    [2]LU Jun, LIN Qian, ZHANG Dan, HU Hong. Effect of cluster nursing on ventilation time and nursing quality in mechanical ventilation neonates[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2020, 24(7): 53-55. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.202007016
    [3]WU Qiong, WANG Huiqin, ZHAO Hongfang. Comparison of different expectoration methods in treatment of severe craniocerebral injury patients with mechanical ventilation[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2020, 24(5): 79-81. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.202005020
    [4]TAO Yu. Cluster nursing intervention in prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia in patients with mechanical ventilation in RICU[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2018, (6): 26-29. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.201806008
    [5]WANG Miao. Effect of mechanical vibration sputum elimination in reducing pulmonary complications in ICU patients with mechanical ventilation after operation[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2017, (10): 70-73. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.201710022
    [6]ZHANG Shouzhen. Effect of comprehensive nursing intervention on ventilator-associated pneumonia in craniocerebral injury patients with mechanical ventilation[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2017, (6): 78-80. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.201706024
    [7]PAN Jingya, WAN Wenxia, LI Xuemei. Nursing of RICU patients with mechanically ventilated in sequential ventilation critical period[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2016, (22): 27-29. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.201622009
    [8]ZHANG Mei. Effect of airway optimized nursing on VAP in patients with severe mechanical ventilation[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2016, (18): 64-66. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.201618021
    [9]ZHOU Xiaojing, XIA fan. Effect of comprehensive nursing intervention on VAP and therapeutic efficacy of ICU mechanical ventilation patients in department of internal medicine[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2016, (14): 1-3. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.201614001
    [10]SUN Jian-lan. Nursing of aged patients with AECOPD by using mechanical ventilation[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2012, (10): 29-30. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-2353.2012.10.013

Catalog

    Article views (457) PDF downloads (21) Cited by()

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return