Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 30, 2025

11:42
Combination of Microstereolithography and Electrospinning to Produce Membranes Equipped with Niches for Corneal Regeneration
Published on: September 12, 2014
12.6K
Amniotic membrane transplantation for acute ocular burns
Gerry Clare1, Catey Bunce2, Stephen Tuft1
1Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
|September 1, 2022
Summary
Amniotic membrane transplantation (AMT) may offer uncertain benefits for moderate ocular burns, but provides no significant advantage for severe burns. Further research is needed to clarify its effectiveness in improving healing and visual outcomes.
Area of Science:
- Ophthalmology
- Regenerative Medicine
- Stem Cell Biology
Background:
- Ocular surface burns damage limbal stem cells, leading to delayed healing and potential vision loss.
- Amniotic membrane transplantation (AMT) is a surgical intervention applied in the acute phase of burns to promote healing.
- The efficacy of AMT for different severities of ocular burns remains debated.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the effectiveness of AMT compared to medical therapy alone for acute ocular surface burns.
- To assess the impact of AMT on re-epithelialisation, visual acuity, and other key outcomes.
Main Methods:
- Systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified through comprehensive database searches.
- Included trials compared AMT plus medical therapy versus medical therapy alone within seven days of injury.
- Outcomes included re-epithelialisation failure, visual acuity, corneal neovascularisation, symblepharon, and time to healing.
Main Results:
- For moderate burns, AMT showed a possible benefit in reducing re-epithelialisation failure and improving visual acuity, though evidence was of very low to low certainty.
- For severe burns, AMT demonstrated no significant benefit in preventing re-epithelialisation failure or improving visual acuity.
- Evidence for other outcomes like neovascularisation and symblepharon was inconclusive for both burn severities due to wide confidence intervals and risk of bias.
Conclusions:
- Current evidence is uncertain regarding the benefits of AMT for moderate acute ocular surface burns.
- AMT does not appear to offer significant advantages for severe ocular burns.
- High risks of bias and imprecision limit definitive conclusions on AMT's efficacy in ocular burn management.

