上睑瘢痕倒睫中前板层后退与双层跗骨旋转

IF 1 Q4 OPHTHALMOLOGY Taiwan Journal of Ophthalmology Pub Date : 2023-05-16 eCollection Date: 2023-07-01 DOI:10.4103/tjo.TJO-D-22-00170
Ezzeldin Ramadan Ezzeldin, Akram Fekry Elgazzar, Mostafa Osman Hussein, Ezzat Nabil Abbas Ibrahim, Ehab Tharwat
{"title":"上睑瘢痕倒睫中前板层后退与双层跗骨旋转","authors":"Ezzeldin Ramadan Ezzeldin, Akram Fekry Elgazzar, Mostafa Osman Hussein, Ezzat Nabil Abbas Ibrahim, Ehab Tharwat","doi":"10.4103/tjo.TJO-D-22-00170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>In recent years, there has been a significant shift from this destructive procedure to a reconstructive procedure such as anterior lamellar recession (ALR) and bilamellar tarsal rotation (BLTR). The aim is to report the outcomes and success rates of ALR compared to BLTR in patients with upper lid cicatricial trichiasis.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Our study is a prospective, interventional, comparative study that was conducted at the Ophthalmology Department of Al-Azhar University Hospital, New Damietta, Egypt. Our study was conducted on 62 eyes of 45 consecutive patients suffering from upper lid cicatricial trichiasis that required surgical intervention (17 patients were bilateral and 28 were unilateral). Thirty-three of them were treated by ALR (group 1), and 29 of them by BLTR (group 2). All statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS version 26.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>As regards the immediate postoperative correction, we found that adequate correction was significantly higher in the ALR group at all follow-up periods (<i>P</i> < 0.05). However, the overcorrection and undercorrection were significantly higher in the BLTR group (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Compared to the ALR group, the BLTR group saw a greater undercorrection at 1, 3, and 6 months (9.3%% vs. 0%; <i>P</i> = 0.048, 18.6% vs. 1.8%%; <i>P</i> = 0.009, 18.6%% vs. 1.8%; <i>P</i> = 0.009, 18.6%% vs. 1.8%; <i>P</i> = 0.009, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ALR is better than BLTR in the treatment of upper lid cicatricial trichiasis.</p>","PeriodicalId":44978,"journal":{"name":"Taiwan Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10712740/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anterior lamellar recession versus bilamellar tarsal rotation in upper lid cicatricial trichiasis.\",\"authors\":\"Ezzeldin Ramadan Ezzeldin, Akram Fekry Elgazzar, Mostafa Osman Hussein, Ezzat Nabil Abbas Ibrahim, Ehab Tharwat\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/tjo.TJO-D-22-00170\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>In recent years, there has been a significant shift from this destructive procedure to a reconstructive procedure such as anterior lamellar recession (ALR) and bilamellar tarsal rotation (BLTR). The aim is to report the outcomes and success rates of ALR compared to BLTR in patients with upper lid cicatricial trichiasis.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Our study is a prospective, interventional, comparative study that was conducted at the Ophthalmology Department of Al-Azhar University Hospital, New Damietta, Egypt. Our study was conducted on 62 eyes of 45 consecutive patients suffering from upper lid cicatricial trichiasis that required surgical intervention (17 patients were bilateral and 28 were unilateral). Thirty-three of them were treated by ALR (group 1), and 29 of them by BLTR (group 2). All statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS version 26.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>As regards the immediate postoperative correction, we found that adequate correction was significantly higher in the ALR group at all follow-up periods (<i>P</i> < 0.05). However, the overcorrection and undercorrection were significantly higher in the BLTR group (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Compared to the ALR group, the BLTR group saw a greater undercorrection at 1, 3, and 6 months (9.3%% vs. 0%; <i>P</i> = 0.048, 18.6% vs. 1.8%%; <i>P</i> = 0.009, 18.6%% vs. 1.8%; <i>P</i> = 0.009, 18.6%% vs. 1.8%; <i>P</i> = 0.009, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ALR is better than BLTR in the treatment of upper lid cicatricial trichiasis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44978,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Taiwan Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10712740/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Taiwan Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/tjo.TJO-D-22-00170\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Taiwan Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/tjo.TJO-D-22-00170","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:近年来,从这种破坏性手术到重建手术的重大转变,如前板层退缩(ALR)和双板层跗骨旋转(BLTR)。目的是报告与BLTR相比,ALR治疗上眼睑瘢痕性倒睫的疗效和成功率。材料和方法:我们的研究是在埃及新达米埃塔爱资哈尔大学医院眼科进行的一项前瞻性、介入性、比较性研究。我们的研究对象是连续45例62只眼的上眼睑瘢痕性倒睫患者,需要手术治疗(17例为双侧,28例为单侧)。ALR治疗33例(1组),BLTR治疗29例(2组)。统计学分析采用SPSS 26版。结果:在术后立即矫正方面,我们发现在所有随访期间,ALR组的矫正率明显高于ALR组(P < 0.05)。而BLTR组的过矫治和欠矫治发生率明显高于对照组(P < 0.05)。与ALR组相比,BLTR组在1、3和6个月时出现了更大的矫正不足(9.3%比0%;P = 0.048, 18.6% vs. 1.8%;P = 0.009, 18.6% vs. 1.8%;P = 0.009, 18.6% vs. 1.8%;P = 0.009)。结论:ALR治疗上睑瘢痕性倒睫优于BLTR。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Anterior lamellar recession versus bilamellar tarsal rotation in upper lid cicatricial trichiasis.

Purpose: In recent years, there has been a significant shift from this destructive procedure to a reconstructive procedure such as anterior lamellar recession (ALR) and bilamellar tarsal rotation (BLTR). The aim is to report the outcomes and success rates of ALR compared to BLTR in patients with upper lid cicatricial trichiasis.

Materials and methods: Our study is a prospective, interventional, comparative study that was conducted at the Ophthalmology Department of Al-Azhar University Hospital, New Damietta, Egypt. Our study was conducted on 62 eyes of 45 consecutive patients suffering from upper lid cicatricial trichiasis that required surgical intervention (17 patients were bilateral and 28 were unilateral). Thirty-three of them were treated by ALR (group 1), and 29 of them by BLTR (group 2). All statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS version 26.

Results: As regards the immediate postoperative correction, we found that adequate correction was significantly higher in the ALR group at all follow-up periods (P < 0.05). However, the overcorrection and undercorrection were significantly higher in the BLTR group (P < 0.05). Compared to the ALR group, the BLTR group saw a greater undercorrection at 1, 3, and 6 months (9.3%% vs. 0%; P = 0.048, 18.6% vs. 1.8%%; P = 0.009, 18.6%% vs. 1.8%; P = 0.009, 18.6%% vs. 1.8%; P = 0.009, respectively).

Conclusion: ALR is better than BLTR in the treatment of upper lid cicatricial trichiasis.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
9.10%
发文量
68
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊最新文献
Advancing glaucoma care with big data and artificial intelligence innovations. Application of artificial intelligence in glaucoma care: An updated review. Artificial intelligence and big data integration in anterior segment imaging for glaucoma. Big data and electronic health records for glaucoma research. Big data for imaging assessment in glaucoma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1