Comparison of pterygium recurrence rates in hispanic and white patients after primary excision and conjunctival autograft

Rom Kandavel, Joann J. Kang, Farnaz Memarzadeh, Roy S. Chuck

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

23 Scopus citations


Purpose: To evaluate the impact of Hispanic and white ethnicity on the recurrence rates of pterygia after primary excision and conjunctival autograft (CAG) in a southern California population. Methods: A retrospective case-control review comparing 15 Hispanic and 11 white patients with primary nasal pterygia was performed. All participants received pterygium excision with superior limbal CAG by 1 of 3 surgeons and postoperative topical steroids for 2 months. The main outcome measure was recurrence after surgery, defined as fibrovascular tissue over the corneoscleral limbus onto clear cornea in the area of previous pterygium excision. Results: Average duration of follow-up in the Hispanic and white groups were 9.3 ± 9.8 months and 13.0 ± 10.7 months, respectively (P = 0.39). During this follow-up period, there was a statistically significant difference in the pterygium recurrence rate between the Hispanic patients, 6 of 15 (40%), and the white patients, 0 of 11 (0%) (P = 0.02). The average time to recurrence was 3.4 ± 1.1 months (range, 1.9-5.0). The difference in average age, male/female composition, and follow-up time between the Hispanic and white patient groups studied was not found to be statistically significant (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Hispanic ethnicity is a potentially important risk factor for recurrence of primary pterygia treated with CAG.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)141-145
Number of pages5
Issue number2
StatePublished - Feb 2010
Externally publishedYes


  • Conjunctival autograft
  • Ethnicity
  • Hispanic
  • Pterygium

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology


Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of pterygium recurrence rates in hispanic and white patients after primary excision and conjunctival autograft'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this