Limbal conjunctival versus amniotic membrane in the intraoperative application of mitomycin C for recurrent pterygium: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: This study compared the outcomes of a limbal conjunctival autograft (LCAG) with those of an amniotic membrane graft (AMG) followed by intraoperative 0.02 % mitomycin C (MMC) to treat recurrent pterygium.

METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, ninety-six eyes with recurrent pterygium were enrolled and randomly allocated into two groups using a computer-generated random number table. Pterygium removal was followed by intraoperative 0.02 % MMC for 3 min and then either LCAG or AMG transplantation. The major outcomes were recurrence rate, conjunctival inflammation grade, healing time of the corneal epithelial defect, eye-movement amplitude (EMA), uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), and complications.

RESULTS: A follow-up of 12 months was conducted for 93 eyes of 82 patients. Grade D (recurrence) presented in one eye of the LCAG group and five eyes of the AMG group, with no between-group difference (p = 0.196). However, Grades A, B, and C presented in 46, zero and zero eyes of the LCAG group respectively, and in 37, two and two eyes of the AMG group respectively, with the surgical bed generally showing a better appearance in the LCAG group than in the AMG group (p = 0.008). Compared with baseline values, the postoperative EMA improved significantly in both groups (p < 0.001 for the LCAG group; p = 0.001 for the AMG group), as did UDVA (p = 0.005 for the LCAG group; p = 0.012 for the AMG group). No between-group differences were found in terms of the healing time for epithelial defect, conjunctival inflammation grade, or the frequency of complications such as punctate epithelial keratitis, episcleral melting, corneal pannus, and delayed corneal epithelium healing.

CONCLUSIONS: LCAG transplantation with intraoperative 0.02 % MMC is as efficacious in treating recurrent pterygium as AMG transplantation with MMC. The former procedure results in an attractive cosmetic appearance but might result in limbal damage in some eyes. The surgeon's familiarity with these procedures should determine the method of treatment.