Conclusions
Electrocauterization for conjunctivoplasty seems to be advantageous in terms of inflammation compared with simple suturing and excision.
Methods
Ten New Zealand white rabbits underwent cauterization in the right eyes and excision and suturing in the left eyes. For each eye, we excised or electrocauterized the inferior bulbar conjunctiva, 1 mm in width and 6 mm in length, 2 mm from the limbus. A fine-needle electrode was inserted subconjunctivally, and electrocauterization was performed. In the contralateral eye, the corresponding area was excised and re-approximated with 10-0 nylon sutures. Sutures were removed after 14 days. Tissue samples were obtained at 21 days post-procedure, and inflammatory cells were counted in five randomly selected fields (×200) on hematoxylin-eosin stained slides. Tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α and interleukin (IL)-1β concentrations in tears were measured using enzyme linked immunosorbent assays.
Purpose
Recently, conjunctivochalasis repair surgery using electrocauterization has been gaining popularity. However, patients with electrocauterized conjunctivoplasty tend to complain of more postoperative pain than patients undergoing simple excision with suturing. Therefore, we investigated the effects of electrocauterization on inflammation of the conjunctiva using an experimental animal model and compared these with the effects of simple excision with suturing.
Results
All cauterized eyes demonstrated smooth surface healing without scarring after 5 days, whereas sutured eyes presented with mild edema with some scarring until the suture was removed. The number of inflammatory cells was significantly greater in sutured eyes compared with cauterized eyes (p = 0.035, Mann-Whitney U-test) at 21 days post-procedure. Tear TNF-α and IL-1β concentrations at 21 days were similar in both groups. Conclusions: Electrocauterization for conjunctivoplasty seems to be advantageous in terms of inflammation compared with simple suturing and excision.