Therapeutic contact lenses vs. tight bandage patching and pain following pterygium excision: a prospective randomized controlled study

  • Daphna Prat
  • Ofira Zloto
  • Elad Ben Artsi
  • Guy J. Ben SimonEmail author



The immediate postoperative management of patients undergoing pterygium excision usually includes eye patching in order to alleviate pain and prevent accidental tissue damage. Commonly applied tight patching with gauze bandages results in decreased field of monocular vision and discomfort. The aim of this study was to evaluate the patient-centered outcome of pterygium surgery when therapeutic contact lenses (TCL) are used instead of tight bandage patching in the first 24 postoperative hours.


Prospective randomized controlled study. Sixty patients with primary pterygium who underwent pterygium surgery consisting of conjunctival autografting with 10–0 Vicryl sutures were randomized into two groups, bandaged with TCLs and tight bandage patching.

Main outcome measures: Degree of pain on an 0–10 scale, use of pain killers, level of patient discomfort, sleep quality, and visual acuity (VA).


Sixty patients were studied. The pain level and pain duration during the first postoperative day was significantly lower in the tight bandage patching group compared with the TCL group (P = 0.034, P = 0.04 respectively). Sleep quality was significantly poorer in the TCL group (P = 0.004). The VA on the first postoperative day was similar for the two groups.


The application of TCL in the first 24 h after pterygium surgery resulted in more discomfort and pain and decreased quality of sleep compared with tight bandage patching. Despite the limitation in monocular vision and the inconvenience of gauze bandages, they are preferred over TCL for alleviating pain following pterygium surgery.


Pterygium Patching Therapeutic contact lenses Patient-centered outcome Pterygium excision 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. 1.
    Jaros PA, DeLuise VP (1988) Pingueculae and pterygia. Surv Ophthalmol 33:41–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ang M, Li X, Wong W et al (2012) Prevalence of and racial differences in pterygium: a multiethnic population study in Asians. Ophthalmology 119:1509–1515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hovanesian JA, Starr CE, Vroman DT et al (2017) Surgical techniques and adjuvants for the management of primary and recurrent pterygia. J Cataract Refract Surg 43:405–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ha J, Cremers SL, Korchak M et al (2016) A new automated method to grade pterygium severity using Scheimpflug imaging. Ophthalmology 123:2435–2436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zloto O, Greenbaum E, Fabian ID, Ben Simon GJ (2017) Evicel versus Tisseel versus sutures for attaching conjunctival autograft in pterygium surgery: a prospective comparative clinical study. Ophthalmology 124:61–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goktas S, Sakarya Y, Ozcimen M et al (2017) Effect of topical cyclopentolate on post-operative pain after pterygium surgery. Clin Exp Optom 100(6):595–597. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Oksuz H, Tamer C (2006) Pain relief after pterygium surgery with viscous lidocaine. Ophthalmologica 220:323–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wishaw K, Billington D, O’Brien D, Davies P (2000) The use of orbital morphine for postoperative analgesia in pterygium surgery. Anaesth Intensive Care 28:43–45PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Genidy MM, Abdelghany AA, Alio JL (2017) Tailored corneo-conjunctival autografting in primary and secondary pterygium surgery. Eur J Ophthalmol 27:407–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Arenas E, Garcia S (2007) A scleral soft contact lens designed for the postoperative management of pterygium surgery. Eye Contact Lens. 33:9–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yu X-Y, Jian Z-Y, Wu W, Lu X-H (2015) Simultaneous treatment of pterygium complicated with conjunctivochalasis: analysis of pterygium excision and conjunctival autotransplantation combined with sclera fixation. BMC Ophthalmol 15:100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yeung SN, Lichtinger A, Kim P et al (2015) Efficacy and safety of patching vs bandage lens on postoperative pain following pterygium surgery. Eye Lond Engl 29:295–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Daglioglu MC, Coskun M, Ilhan N et al (2014) The effects of soft contact lens use on cornea and patient’s recovery after autograft pterygium surgery. Contact Lens Anterior Eye J Br Contact Lens Assoc 37:175–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chen D, Lian Y, Li J et al (2014) Monitor corneal epithelial healing under bandage contact lens using ultrahigh-resolution optical coherence tomography after pterygium surgery. Eye Contact Lens 40:175–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daphna Prat
    • 1
  • Ofira Zloto
    • 1
  • Elad Ben Artsi
    • 1
  • Guy J. Ben Simon
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Goldschleger Eye Institute, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel; Sackler Faculty of MedicineTel Aviv UniversityTel HashomerIsrael

Personalised recommendations