32.1.35 A Random Trial Comparing Mitomycin C and Autograft of Conjunctiva After Excision of Primary Pterygium

Original Article

 

Comparing Mitomycin C and Autograft of Conjunctiva

A Random Trial Comparing Mitomycin C and Autograft of Conjunctiva After Excision of Primary Pterygium

Shahid Anwar Bhatti1, Tanveer Ahmad2, Tariq2, Imran Akram Sahaf2, Abdul Sammad2,  and Anum Imran2

ABSTRACT

Objective: To study a random trial comparing mitomycin C and autograft of conjunctiva after excision of primary pterygium

Study Design: Prospective study

Place and Duration of Study: This study was conducted at the Sahara Medical College, Narowal and Imran Idris Teaching Hospital Sialkot Medical College, Sialkot during Jan 2019 to April 2020.

Materials and Methods: Prospective work on successive cases of primary pterygium (Jan 2019 to April 2020) random into two adjuvant groups: (1) During operation zero point zero two percent mitomycin C for five minutes or (2) LCAU. Patients were followed for occurring again (defined as consisting of fibers and conducting cells tissue invading the cornea >one point five mm) and problems for a period of one year. The written informed consent was taken before taking history and examination. Ethical Committee Permission was consider before collecting the findings and get publishing in Medical Journal. The findings were analyzed for results by SPSS version 20.

Results: One fifty eyes in one fifty patients who completed the study were random to receive mitomycin C (n = seventy five) and LCAU (n = seventy five). There were twenty again occurring (thirteen point thirty three percent) in the mitomycin C group and only one again occurring (zero point six percent) in the LCAU group. There was a statistically significant difference in the occurring again rate between the two groups (p = zero point zero four). There were a total of three cysts of conjunctiva, three symblepharon, one a mass of granulation tissue, and one dent. No other visually significant issues were seen in either group.

Conclusion: This study indicated that LCAU has given good findings in terms of success but it does not give better results in cases of recurrence. Simple excising followed by Mitomycin C or LCAU are both without causing death effects and appreciative for pterygium excision.

Key Words: Pterygium, Conjunctival Limbal Autograft, Mitomycin C

Citation of article: Bhatti SA, Ahmad T, Tariq, Sahaf IA, Sammad A, Imran A. A Random Trial
Comparing Mitomycin C and Autograft of Conjunctiva After Excision of Primary Pterygium.
Med Forum 2021;32(1):145-148.

 

 

INTRODUCTION

Pterygium is a international condition with a “pterygium belt” between the parallel thirty degree north and south of the equator.1 Pterygium is incidence in Hong Kong, situated twenty two degree north of the equator.2 Situated beyond the visible spectrum at its violet end exposure is a major danger factor for its growth.3

 

 

1. Department of Eye, Sahara Medical College, Narowal.

2. Department of Eye, Sialkot Medical College, Sialkot.

 

 

Correspondence: Dr. Shahid Anwar Bhatti, Associate Professor of, Eye Sahara Medical College, Narowal.

Contact No: 03349802625

Email: hamzadrshahidanwar@yahoo.com

 

 

Received:  August, 2020

Accepted:  November, 2020

Printed:      January, 2021

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Simple excising have a high occurring again rate ranging from twenty four percent to eighty nine percent.4 The adding of mitomycin C of various dilution has been noted to be constructive in stopping occurring again.5–7 However, mitomycin C may result in wasting problems such as scleral death of cells and microbial contaminations.8–12,7,13–15

Many works comparing mitomycin C with centigrams have been published. However, in the meaning of findings, it is important to compare the following: (1) primary or occurring again pterygium; (2) during operation or after operation mitomycin C; (3) simple centigrams or LCAU. Based on published findings from previous works, LCAU appears to be more constructive in the stopping of pterygium occurring again. However, to the best of our knowledge, no probable work has directly compared during operation mitomycin C with LCAU for primary pterygium. We therefore set out to do a probable random trial to guess the relative constructive these two adjuvants.

 

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospective work on successive cases of primary pterygium (Jan 2019 to April 2020) random into two adjuvant groups: (1) During operation zero point zero two percent mitomycin C for five minutes or (2) LCAU. Patients were followed for occurring again (defined as consisting of fibers and conducting cells tissue invading the cornea >one point five mm) and problems for a period of one year. The written informed consent was taken before taking history and examination. Ethical Committee Permission was consider before collecting the findings and get publishing in Medical Journal. The findings were analyzed for results by SPSS version 20.

Inclusion criteria: All the patients of conjunctival autograft after excision of primary pterygium.

Exclusion criteria: Collagen vascular disease or other autoimmune disease, pregnancy, pathology of ocular surface or contamination, previous surgery of limbus, and double head pterygium were excluded.

RESULTS

One fifty eyes in one fifty patients who completed the study were random to receive mitomycin C (n = seventy five) and LCAU (n = seventy five). There were twenty again occurring (thirteen point thirty three percent) in the mitomycin C group and only one again occurring (zero point six percent) in the LCAU group. There was a statistically significant difference in the occurring again rate between the two groups (p = zero point zero four). There were a total of three cysts of conjunctiva, three symblepharon, one a mass of granulation tissue, and one dent. No other visually significant issues were seen in either group.

The mean age was fifty eight point zero six ± fourteen point sixty seven in MMC and fifty nine point ninety six ± ten point five in LCAU and fifty eight point ninety eight  ± twelve point ninety three in MMC + LCAU and p value was zero point sixty eight.

 

 

Table No. 1. Demographic and clinical data of patients in group 1 mitomycin C and group 2 (LCAU) 

Age (years)

MMC (n = 75)

LCAU (n = 75)

MMC+LCAU (n = 150)

p Value

Mean age (years)

58.06 ± 14.67

59.96 ± 10.5

58.98 ± 12.93

0.68

Age range (years)

32–84

39–81

32–84

Sex

Male

28(37.33%)

30(40%)

58(38.66%)

 

female

47(62.66%)

45(60%)

92(61.33%)

 

Laterality

Right

35(46.66%)

30(40%)

65(43.33%)

 

Left

40(53.33%)

45(60%)

85(56.66%)

 

Follow up (months)

16.17 ± 3.47

16.73 ± 4.01

16.43 ±  3.71

0.427

Mean size of pterygium across limbus in length(mm)

4.183 ± 1.375

3.962 ± 1.240

4.083 ± 1.314

0.372

Preoperative BCVA (LogMAR)

0.4234 ± 0.3644

0.3380 ± 0.2514

0.3850 ± 0.3199

0.154

Postoperative BCVA 1 year (LogMAR)

0.2870 ± 0.3035

0.2325 ± 0.2149

0.2624 ± 0.2674

0.277

 

 

 

Table No. 2: Number of recurrences of mitomycin C v LCAU groups

Months

MMC (n = 75)

LCAU (n = 75)

MMC+LCAU(n = 150)

3 months

2(10%)

2 (28.57%)

4 (18.18%)

6 months

8(40%)

2 (28.57%)

8 (36.36%)

9 months

4(20%)

1 (14.28%)

4 (18.18%)

1year

6(30%)

2 (28.57%)

6 (27.27%)

Total

20(13.33%)

07(4.66%)

22(14.66%)

The male in MMC was 28(37.33%) and LCAU 30(40%), MMC+LCAU 58(38.66%) and in female patients MMC was 47(62.66%) and LCAU 45(60%), MMC+LCAU 92(61.33%). Right eye of the patients there was 35(46.66%) in MMC and LCAU 30(40%) and MMC+LCAU 65(43.33%) and in left eye 40(53.33%) in MMC and LCAU 45(60%) and MMC+LCAU 85(56.66%). The follow up (month) was 16.17 ± 3.47 in MMC and LCAU 16.73 ± 4.01 and MMC+LCAU 16.43 ± 3.71 and p-value 0.427. Mean size of pterygium across limbus in length (mm) 4.183 ± 1.375 MMC and LCAU 3.962 ± 1.240 and MMC+LCAU 4.083 ± 1.314 and p-value 0.372. Preoperative BCVA (Log MAR) 0.4234 ± 0.3644 MMC and LCAU 0.3380 ± 0.2514and MMC+LCAU 0.3850 ± 0.3199 and p-value 0.154. Postoperative BCVA 1 year (Log MAR) 0.2870 ± 0.3035 MMC and LCAU 0.2325 ± 0.2149 and MMC+LCAU 0.2624 ± 0.2674and p-value 0.277 as shown in table 1.

There were ten occurring again (fifteen point nine percent) in the mitomycin C group—1 at three months, four at six months, two at nine months, and three at twelve months (table 2). There was only one occurring again (one point nine percent) in the LCAU group identified at three months and the difference in occurring again rates was statistically significant (p =zero point zero four). There were three cysts of conjunctiva (two mitomycin C, one LCAU), three symblephara (two mitomycin C, one LCAU), one granuloma mitomycin C, and one dellen mitomycin C. No scleral thinning, necrosis, or any other visually significant complications were encountered in either group as shown in table no 2.

DISCUSSION

Mitomycin C is an process of introducing one or more alkyl groups, inhibit the development of a cancer agent which prevents cellular division and multiplication by inhibiting Doxy Nuclic Acid formation. Products of its ability to produce desired output would include the stage at which Mitomycin C is applied and whether the sclera is covered with conjunctiva. Intra operation Mitomycin C is required and the present treatment of zero point zero two percent Mitomycin C for five minutes has been found to be prefered.5,6 An repeatedly to prove outcome is the application of CG.6,11 The epithelium of limbus was added in the  CG would help to replace its stopping function. Present study on LCAU noted its orderliness in the stopping of
pterygial occurring again (zero to twelve point five percent).7,13–15 Al Fayez compared CG with LCAU (including primary and occurring again cases) and noted superior effective for occurring again pterygia (no significant benefit for primary). However, one should note that no occurring again occurred in the LCAU group and the sample size was small.13 As LCAU may be more efficient than CG, we therefore conducted the first random trial to directly compare the efficient of Mitomycin C with LCAU.

The Mitomycin C occurring again rate was fifteen point nine percent, in comparison with thirty eight percent noted by Chen et al11 and ten point five percent by Manning et al with the application of zero point four mg/ml for three minutes.15-19

CONCLUSION

This study indicated that LCAU has given good findings in terms of success but it does not give better results in cases of recurrence. Simple excising followed by Mitomycin C or LCAU are both without causing death effects and appreciative for pterygium excision.

Author’s Contribution:

Concept & Design of Study:

Shahid Anwar Bhatti

Drafting:

Tanveer Ahmad, Tariq

Data Analysis:

Imran Akram Sahaf, Abdul Sammad, Anum Imran

Revisiting Critically:

Shahid Anwar Bhatti, Tanveer Ahmad

Final Approval of version:

Shahid Anwar Bhatti

Conflict of Interest: The study has no conflict of interest to declare by any author.

REFERENCES

1.     Cameron ME. Pterygium throughout the world Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas, 1965.

2.     Karukonda SR, Thompson HW, Beuerman RW, et al. Cell cycle kinetics in pterygium at three latitudes. Br J Ophthalmol 1995;79:313–17. 

3.     Moran DJ, Hollows FC. Pterygium and ultraviolet radiation: a positive correlation. Br J Ophthalmol  1984;68:343–6. 

4.     Jaros PA, DeLuise VP. Pingueculae and pterygium. Surv Ophthalmol 1988;33:41–9.

5.     Lam DS, Wong AK, Fan DS, et al. Intraoperative mitomycin C to prevent recurrence of pterygium after excision: a 30-month follow-up study.  Ophthalmol 1998;105:901–4.

6.     Manning CA, Kloess PM, Diaz MD, et al.  Intraoperative mitomycin in primary pterygium excision. A prospective, randomized trial. Ophthalmol 1997;104:844–8.

7.     Mutlu FM, Sobaci G, Tatar T, et al. A comparative study of recurrent pterygium surgery: limbal conjunctival autograft transplantation versus mitomycin C with conjunctival flap.  Ophthalmol 1999;106:817–21.

8.     Dunn JP, Seamone CD, Ostler HB, et al.  Development of scleral ulceration and calcification after pterygium excision and mitomycin therapy. Am J Ophthalmol  1991;112:343–4.

9.     Dougherty PJ, Hardten DR, Lindstrom RL. Corneoscleral melt after pterygium surgery using a single intraoperative application of mitomycin-C. Cornea 1996;15:537–40.

10.            Rubinfeld RS, Pfister RR, Stein RM, et al. Serious complications of topical mitomycin-C after pterygia surgery. Ophthalmol 1992;99:1647–54.

11.            Chen PP, Ariyasu RG, Kaza V, et al. A randomized trial comparing mitomycin C and conjunctival autograft after excision of primary pterygium. Am J Ophthalmol 1995;120:151–60.

12.            Tseng SC. Concept and application of limbal stem cells. Eye 1989;3:141–57.

13.            Al Fayez MF. Limbal versus conjunctival autograft transplantation for advanced and recurrent pterygium. Ophthalmol 2002;109:1752–5.

14.            Gris O, Guell JL, del Campo Z. Limbal-conjunctival autograft transplantation for the treatment of recurrent pterygium. Ophthalmol 2000;107:270–3.

15.            Rao SK, Lekha T, Mukesh BN, et al. Conjunctival-limbal autografts for primary and recurrent pterygia: technique and results. Ind J Ophthalmol 1998;46:203–9.

16.            Ti SE, Chee SP, Dear KB, et al. Analysis of variation in success rates in conjunctival autografting for primary and recurrent pterygium. Br J Ophthalmol 2000;84:385–9. 

17.            Ma DH, See LC, Liau SB, et al. Amniotic membrane graft for primary pterygium: compa-rison with conjunctival autograft and topical mitomycin C treatment. Br J Ophthalmol 2000; 84:973–8. 

18.            Sharma A, Gupta A, Ram J, et al. Low-dose intraoperative mitomycin-C versus conjunctival autograft in primary pterygium surgery: long term follow-up.Ophthalmic Surg Lasers 2000;31:301–7.

19.            Wong AK, Rao SK, Leung AT, et al. Inferior limbal-conjunctival autograft transplantation for recurrent pterygium. Ind J Ophthalmol 2000; 48:21–4.