Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 332

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Pupil. Anatomy, Physiology and Clinical Applications.

Open access
DIAMOND, J P·2001·British Journal of Ophthalmology

Abstract

Comparative study of intraoperative mitomycin C and irradiation in pterygium surgery EDITOR,-We read with interest the study that compared intraoperative mitomycin C with irradiation in primary pterygium surgery. 1 The authors rightly commented that long term complications of irradiation, such as scleral necrosis, may arise more than 10 years after the irradiation.2 Longer follow ups are necessary to reveal such complications.We performed primary pterygium excision with intraoperative irradiation in one eye of six patients between 1988 and 1990.A dose of 1000 rad of irradiation was applied to the scleral bed intraoperatively and 1 week later.The patients were recently reviewed in our clinic for recurrence and complications.We also performed ultrasound biomicroscopic examination (UBM) for both eyes in each patient, looking for corneal and scleral thinning.Corneal thickness was arbitrarily measured 0.5 mm anterior to the scleral spur at the 12, 3, 6, and 9 o'clock positions of each eye, while the scleral thickness was measured 2 mm posterior to the scleral spur at the same positions.Mean follow up was 138.0 months.Mean age at time of surgery was 37.5 years (range 32-45 years).All six eyes were right eyes with nasal pterygia in male patients.No recurrence was found, using the same definition.There was neither significant deterioration in visual acuity nor increase in intraocular pressure in any eye.There were no signs of inflammation.There were no significant diVerences in the scleral and corneal thickness between the treated nasal position of the operated eye (mean scleral 0.617 (SD 0.112) mm; mean corneal 0.656 (0.076) mm) and the control nasal position of the fellow eye (mean scleral 0.611 (0.030) mm; mean corneal 0.645 (0.044) mm).Furthermore, there were no significant diVerences in the mean scleral and corneal thickness between the operated eye (scleral 0.590 (0.077) mm; corneal 0.635 (0.067) mm) and the fellow eye (scleral 0.590 (0.059) mm; corneal 0.624 (0.054) mm).The mean scleral and corneal thicknesses were calculated by averaging the scleral or corneal thickness at the four measured positions in each eye.It appears that irradiation is safe, even in the long term.We believe these additional data could supplement the findings by Amano et al.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bjo.85.1.121e

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 332

Metadata

Authors
DIAMOND, J. P.
Venue
British Journal of Ophthalmology
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2001-01-01
Volume
85
Issue
1
Pages
121e-121
ISSN
0007-1161 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2016024334
Cited by
332
References
0
FWCI
3.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Pupil. Anatomy, Physiology and Clinical Applications. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bjo.85.1.121e
The paper
DIAMOND, J. P. (2001). The Pupil. Anatomy, Physiology and Clinical Applications. British Journal of Ophthalmology. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.85.1.121e

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.