Abstract
PurposeTo evaluate the clinical outcomes of conjunctival autograft (CAG) versus simple limbal epithelial transplant (SLET) for management of unilateral partial limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD).MethodsThis retrospective, comparative, interventional case series evaluated 30 eyes of 30 patients with unilateral partial LSCD. After corneal pannus dissection, 17 patients underwent CAG where graft was harvested from the ipsilateral or contralateral eye, while 13 patients underwent SLET where limbal biopsy was harvested from the contralateral eye. The primary outcome measure was anatomical success in the form of restoration of a completely epithelised, stable, and avascular corneal surface at last follow-up.ResultsBoth groups were comparable in terms of age at time of surgery, preoperative best-corrected visual acuity, median duration since injury, number of clock hours of limbus involved, and number of previous surgeries performed. The most common etiology for LSCD was chemical burns in both groups. The median duration of post-operative follow-up was 5.6 months [interquartile range [(IQR): 3.6–15.1] in the CAG group versus 6.2 months (IQR: 4.5–12.2) in the SLET group (p=0.75)]. The anatomical success rates were 86.5 ± 8.9% in the CAG group and 28.3 ± 13.7% in the SLET group at final follow-up visit (p = 0.025). Most failures in both groups occurred within the first 8 months after surgery.ConclusionFor eyes with unilateral partial LSCD secondary to chemical burns, CAG is a safe and effective method for restoring the corneal epithelium. Limbal transplantation may not be necessary for the treatment of partial LSCD.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.