Mechanisms of Corneal Pain and Implications for Postoperative Pain After Laser Correction of Refractive Errors

Topical Ophthalmic Anesthetics for CornealAbrasions: Findings from a Cochrane SystematicReview and Meta-Analysis

Background

Despite potential benefit, outpatient use of topical ophthalmic anesthetics can result in poor healing, infection, scar, and blindness. An unbiased analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is needed to examine their effectiveness and safety compared with placebo or other treatments for corneal abrasions.

Methods

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase.com, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched on February 10, 2023, without restriction on language or publication date.

Results

Systematic review and meta-analysis of nine RCTs describing 314 participants with post-traumatic abrasions and 242 participants with post-surgical abrasions, with a median study length of 7 days (interquartile range, 7-14), show no evidence of a difference in pain control between anesthetics and placebo at 24 hours in post-trauma cases. Self-reported pain at 24 hours is reduced with anesthetics plus topical nonsteroid anti-inflammatory drug in post-surgical participants (mean difference [MD], -5.72 on a 10-point scale; 95% CI, -7.35 to -4.09; 1 RCT; 30 participants) and at 48 hours with anesthetics alone in post-trauma participants (MD, -5.68; 95% CI, -6.38 to -4.98; 1 RCT; 111 participants). Anesthetics are associated with 37% increased risk of non-healing defects (risk ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.78 to 2.42; 3 RCTs; 221 post-trauma participants). All evidence is of very low certainty. Over 50% of trials have an overall high risk of bias.

Conclusions

Available evidence is insufficient to support outpatient use of topical anesthetics for corneal abrasions with respect to pain, re-epithelialization, and complication risk.

Use of Topical Anesthetics in the Management of Patients With Simple Corneal Abrasions: Consensus Guidelines From the American College of Emergency Physicians

The management of corneal abrasions has largely excluded dispensing topical local anesthetics for home use due to concern for corneal toxicity. We have reviewed and critically appraised the available literature evidence regarding the use of topical anesthetics in patients with simple corneal abrasions. Using sequential Delphi review, we have developed these clinical guidelines. Herein are evidentiary summaries and consensus recommendations for 8 specific relevant questions. Our key observation is that for only simple corneal abrasions, as diagnosed and treated in accordance with the full protocol described herein, it appears safe to prescribe or otherwise provide a commercial topical anesthetic (ie, proparacaine, tetracaine, oxybuprocaine) for use up to every 30 minutes as needed during the first 24 hours after presentation, as long as no more than 1.5 to 2 mL total (an expected 24-hour supply) is dispensed and any remainder is discarded after 24 hours. Importantly, although published findings suggest absent harm for short courses, more rigorous studies with a greater cumulative sample size and ophthalmologic follow-up are needed.

Preservative-Free Topical Anesthetic Unit-Dose Eye Drops for the Management of Postoperative Pain Following Photorefractive Keratectomy

INTRODUCTION

Ocular pain is a common complication following photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). The level of patient satisfaction with current pain control strategies is not high. This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of a novel regimen of preservative-free oxybuprocaine hydrochloride 0.4% unit-dose eye drops for post-PRK pain control.

METHODS

In a contralateral eye study, 144 eyes of 72 patients who underwent bilateral transepithelial PRK (TransPRK) were stratified into experimental and control groups. The experimental group received preservative-free oxybuprocaine hydrochloride 0.4% unit-dose eye drops five times daily postoperatively until complete epithelial healing, while the control group received sodium hyaluronate 0.2% instead. The main outcome measures were pain scores assessed by the verbal rating scale and visual analogue scale (VRS, VAS), the corneal epithelial defect (CED) area, epithelial healing duration evaluated by slit-lamp biomicroscopy and anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT), and endothelial cell density (ECD) measured before and 1 month after surgery.

RESULTS

Pain scores assessed by VRS and VAS were significantly lower in the experimental group 8 h after surgery, and 1, 2, and 3 days postoperatively (P < 0.001). The mean CED area showed no significant differences between the two groups at different follow-ups (P value > 0.05). The corneal epithelial healing had a mean duration of 3.32 ± 0.47 days in both studied groups and was parallel in both eyes of each patient. In each group, 49 eyes (68%) and 72 eyes (100%) had a fully epithelialized surface on the third and fourth postoperative days, respectively. No significant changes were observed in the mean ECD 1 month following surgery in both groups (P value > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Preservative-free oxybuprocaine hydrochloride 0.4% unit-dose eye drops are effective and safe in controlling early postoperative pain following TransPRK. The availability of the single-dose unit preparation can overcome the problem of topical anesthetic abuse.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05733741.

Topical formulations of Aprepitant are safe and effective in relieving pain and inflammation, and drive neural regeneration

PURPOSE

To test long-term ocular toxicity and analgesic/anti-inflammatory efficacy of two novel ocular formulations of neurokinin 1 receptor (NK1R) antagonist Aprepitant.

METHODS

for toxicity studies, two Aprepitant formulations (X and Y) were tested on C57BL/6 N mice. Gold standards were 0.4% Oxybuprocaine, 0.1% Diclofenac, or saline. For efficacy studies, C57BL/6 N mice underwent corneal alkali burn, and then received Aprepitant formulation X, Dexamethasone or saline. Eye-drops were applied 3 times/day for 90 days (toxicity) and 14 days (efficacy). Stromal opacity, corneal epithelial damage, nociception and sensitivity were assessed in vivo. The eye-wiping test and corneal sensitivity were assessed to evaluate analgesic efficacy and nerve function. At the end of the experiments mice were euthanized, and corneas were dissected for immunohistochemistry and RT-PCR analyses.

RESULTS

In normal mice, formulation X was not toxic when topically administered for 90 days. Formulation Y was associated with increased leukocyte infiltration in the cornea (p < 0.001). X1 and X2 formulations significantly reduced corneal pain, as Diclofenac and Oxybuprocaine, but did not reduce corneal sensitivity. Formulation Y, instead, was not analgesic at any time point. In the alkali burn model, X1 and X2 formulation enhanced epithelial damage recovery, and reduced inflammation both at day 7 and 14. Moreover, formulation X showed a stronger analgesic effect when compared to the saline and Dexamethasone groups (p < 0.01). Finally, formulation X1 and X2 restored corneal sensitivity by promoting corneal nerve regeneration.

CONCLUSIONS

Aprepitant X formulation is a promising candidate for the treatment of pain associated with inflammation of the ocular surface.

Topical ophthalmic anesthetics for corneal abrasions

BACKGROUND

Despite potential analgesic benefits from topical ophthalmic amides and esters, their outpatient use has become of concern because of the potential for abuse and ophthalmic complications.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of topical ophthalmic anesthetics compared with placebo or other treatments in persons with corneal abrasions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; Embase.com; Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences (LILACS); ClinicalTrials.gov; and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), without restriction on language or year of publication. The search was performed on 10 February 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of topical ophthalmic anesthetics alone or in combination with another treatment (e.g. nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)) versus a non-anesthetic control group (e.g. placebo, non-treatment, or alternative treatment). We included trials that enrolled participants of all ages who had corneal abrasions within 48 hours of presentation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine parallel-group RCTs with a total of 556 participants (median number of participants per study: 45, interquartile range (IQR) 44 to 74), conducted in eight countries: Australia, Canada, France, South Korea, Turkey, New Zealand, UK, and USA. Study characteristics and risk of bias Four RCTs (314 participants) investigated post-traumatic corneal abrasions diagnosed in the emergency department setting. Five trials described 242 participants from ophthalmology surgery centers with post-surgical corneal defects: four from photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and one from pterygium surgery. Study duration ranged from two days to six months, the most common being one week (four RCTs). Treatment duration ranged from three hours to one week (nine RCTs); the majority were between 24 and 48 hours (five RCTs). The age of participants was reported in eight studies, ranging from 17 to 74 years of age. Only one participant in one trial was under 18 years of age. Of four studies that reported funding sources, none was industry-sponsored. We judged a high risk of bias in one trial with respect to the outcome pain control by 48 hours, and in five of seven trials with respect to the outcome complications at the furthest time point. The domain for which we assessed studies to be at the highest risk of bias was missing or selective reporting of outcome data. Findings The treatments investigated included topical anesthetics compared with placebo, topical anesthetic compared with NSAID (post-surgical cases), and topical anesthetics plus NSAID compared with placebo (post-surgical cases). Pain control by 24 hours In all studies, self-reported pain outcomes were on a 10-point scale, where lower numbers represent less pain. In post-surgical trials, topical anesthetics provided a moderate reduction in self-reported pain at 24 hours compared with placebo of 1.28 points on a 10-point scale (mean difference (MD) -1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.76 to -0.80; 3 RCTs, 119 participants). In the post-trauma participants, there may be little or no difference in effect (MD -0.04, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.02; 1 RCT, 76 participants). Compared with NSAID in post-surgical participants, topical anesthetics resulted in a slight increase in pain at 24 hours (MD 0.82, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.63; 1 RCT, 74 participants). One RCT compared topical anesthetics plus NSAID to placebo. There may be a large reduction in pain at 24 hours with topical anesthetics plus NSAID in post-surgical participants, but the evidence to support this large effect is very uncertain (MD -5.72, 95% CI -7.35 to -4.09; 1 RCT, 30 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Pain control by 48 hours Compared with placebo, topical anesthetics reduced post-trauma pain substantially by 48 hours (MD -5.68, 95% CI -6.38 to -4.98; 1 RCT, 111 participants) but had little to no effect on post-surgical pain (MD 0.41, 95% CI -0.45 to 1.27; 1 RCT, 44 participants), although the evidence is very uncertain. Pain control by 72 hours One post-surgical RCT showed little or no effect of topical anesthetics compared with placebo by 72 hours (MD 0.49, 95% CI -0.06 to 1.04; 44 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Proportion of participants with unresolved epithelial defects When compared with placebo or NSAID, topical anesthetics increased the number of participants without complete resolution of defects in trials of post-trauma participants (risk ratio (RR) 1.37, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.42; 3 RCTs, 221 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The proportion of placebo-treated post-surgical participants with unresolved epithelial defects at 24 to 72 hours was lower when compared with those assigned to topical anesthetics (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.55; 1 RCT, 30 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or topical anesthetics plus NSAID (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.85; 1 RCT, 30 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Proportion of participants with complications at the longest follow-up When compared with placebo or NSAID, topical anesthetics resulted in a higher proportion of post-trauma participants with complications at up to two weeks (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.23 to 5.46; 3 RCTs, 242 participants) and post-surgical participants with complications at up to one week (RR 7.00, 95% CI 0.38 to 128.02; 1 RCT, 44 participants). When topical anesthetic plus NSAID was compared with placebo, no complications were reported in either treatment arm up to one week post-surgery (risk difference (RD) 0.00, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.12; 1 RCT, 30 participants). The evidence is very uncertain for safety outcomes. Quality of life None of the included trials assessed quality of life outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite topical anesthetics providing excellent pain control in the intraoperative setting, the currently available evidence provides little or no certainty about their efficacy for reducing ocular pain in the initial 24 to 72 hours after a corneal abrasion, whether from unintentional trauma or surgery. We have very low confidence in this evidence as a basis to recommend topical anesthetics as an efficacious treatment modality to relieve pain from corneal abrasions. We also found no evidence of a substantial effect on epithelial healing up to 72 hours or a reduction in ocular complications when we compared anesthetics alone or with NSAIDs versus placebo.

Preoperative Predictors for Acute Pain After Photorefractive Keratectomy

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to identify preoperative predictors for the occurrence of early severe postoperative pain in patients undergoing photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). The implementation of preoperative screening methods may facilitate more specific or aggressive pain therapies specifically targeted to individuals at a high risk of experiencing severe postoperative pain.

METHODS

This was exploratory research that included patients who underwent PRK. Before PRK, patients were administered a sociodemographic questionnaire, the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and underwent corneal sensitivity and conditioned pain modulation (CPM) tests. Post-PRK pain was assessed using a pain intensity visual analog scale (VAS), and the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) was completed 21 days before PRK and 1, 24, 48, and 72 hours after PRK. Spearman correlations were calculated for pain scores and preoperative predictors.

RESULTS

This research included 34 eyes of 34 patients. Preoperative corneal sensitivity was positively correlated with post-PRK pain scores as assessed by VAS and SF-MPQ (rho = 0.39 and rho = 0.41, respectively, P < 0.05). No correlations were found between Pain Catastrophizing Scale, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, and CPM scores and post-PRK pain scores (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Abnormal presurgical corneal sensitivity was a protective marker for severe pain after PRK, while scores as assessed by VAS and SF-MPQ and CPM were not related to postoperative pain.

Effects of Regular/Dilute Proparacaine Anesthetic Eye Drops in Combination with Ophthalmic Antibiotics on Corneal Wound Healing

Purpose: Topical, local anesthetic eye drops in conjunction with antibiotics are commonly used to reduce ocular pain and treat patients in emergency clinics; however, their effects on corneal healing are poorly understood. This study examined whether regular or diluted proparacaine eye drops given in combination with common ophthalmic antibiotics affect corneal wound healing parameters using in vitro and in vivo models. Methods: Primary human corneal fibroblasts generated from donor corneas and New Zealand white rabbits were used. Regular (0.5%) and diluted (0.05%) proparacaine eye drops, twice daily for 3 days, were applied to cultures and rabbit eyes, with or without ophthalmic antibiotics (polymyxin B sulfate and trimethoprim). Trypan blue, 3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT), and scratch wound assays measured cellular viability, proliferation, and migration, respectively, in vitro. Slit lamp biomicroscopy, tonometry, fluorescein eye test, hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining, and 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) immunofluorescence were used for in vivo studies. Results: Both regular and diluted proparacaine affected wound healing response in the cornea in vitro and in vivo in a time-dependent manner. Adjunct antibiotic treatments had additive effects characterized by reduced corneal fibroblast viability, proliferation, and migration in vitro and corneal epithelial recovery in vivo. Regular proparacaine with antibiotics showed most pronounced effects on corneal wound healing parameters, and diluted proparacaine without antibiotics had minimal negative effects in vitro and in vivo. Conclusions: Both methods of regular (0.5%) and diluted (0.05%) proparacaine topical application to the cornea are safe, but impede corneal wound healing in vitro and in vivo. Adjunct antibiotic treatments had additive negative effects on corneal wound repair.

The use of topical nalbuphine in different concentrations to control pain after photorefractive keratectomy

PURPOSE

This is a randomized controlled study aiming to evaluate the safety and efficacy of two different concentrations of topical nalbuphine hydrochloride, when used to relieve pain in the first days following photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).

METHODS

This is a prospective double blinded randomized clinical trial that included 189 patients who had PRK for correction of low and moderate refractive errors. Patients were randomly assigned to three groups according to the eye drops given to relieve pain in the first three postoperative days; the first group received topical nalbuphine with a concentration of 2 mg/ml (Group A = 64 patients), the second group received topical nalbuphine in a concentration of 1 mg/ml (Group B = 69 patients) and the third group received topical artificial tears only (Group C = 56 patients).The patients were asked to rate their pain daily using a numeric rating scale and to record the number of drops instillation times/day. The time needed for complete epithelial healing, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and spherical equivalent after three months were recorded in each group.

RESULTS

In the first three days, there was a statistically significant difference in pain score among the three groups with lower values in the two topical nalbuphine groups when compared with the control group receiving artificial tears. Moreover, the higher concentration group showed significantly lower pain score and less number of drops used /day in comparison with the lower concentration group.There were no statistically significant differences in epithelial healing time, BCVA and spherical equivalent after three months among the three groups.

CONCLUSION

The use of topical nalbuphine is effective in relieving pain in the first few days following PRK and this pain relief is not associated with any compromise regarding epithelial healing nor refractive outcome. The pain control with 2 mg/ml concentration is significantly higher than that with 1 mg/ml concentration of nalbuphine. Trial registration numberISRCTN21394752 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN21394752 The trial is retrospectively registered in ISRCTN registry at March 08, 2021.

Immunity and pain in the eye: focus on the ocular surface

Most ocular diseases are associated with pain. While pain has been generally considered a mere (deleterious) additional symptom, it is now emerging that it is a key modulator of innate/adaptive immunity. Because the cornea receives the highest nerve density of the entire body, it is an ideal site to demonstrate interactions between pain and the immune response. Indeed, most neuropeptides involved in pain generation are also potent regulators of innate and adaptive leukocyte physiology. On the other hand, most inflammatory cells can modulate the generation of ocular pain through release of specific mediators (cytokines, chemokines, growth factors, and lipid mediators). This review will discuss the reciprocal role(s) of ocular surface (and specifically: corneal) pain on the immune response of the eye. Finally, we will discuss the clinical implications of such reciprocal interactions in the context of highly prevalent corneal diseases.

Comparison of Postoperative Symptoms of Alcohol-Assisted Versus Mechanical Epithelial Removal in Photorefractive Keratectomy: A Contralateral Double Blind Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

To compare the short-term complaints of postoperative pain, and other ocular discomfort symptoms in patients who underwent photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) with alcohol-assisted epithelial removal in one eye versus mechanical debridement in the other eye.

METHOD

A prospective, interventional, contralateral double blind clinical trial was performed on 164 eyes of 82 candidates of PRK surgery. The patients were divided into two groups. The first group was alcohol-assisted PRK group in which the epithelial removal was performed on their right eye. The second group was mechanical PRK group in which epithelial removal was performed on their left eye. A numerical rating scale was given to the patients to describe the severity of postoperative pain on the first day following PRK. Postoperative discomfort symptoms including the complaints of light sensitivity, tearing, blurring, and foreign body sensation was also provided by the survey form.

RESULTS

One day following PRK, the mean pain score of the alcohol-assisted PRK group and the mechanical PRK group was 3.4±3.1 and 4.1±3.3, respectively (P=0.019). The highest scores recorded for alcohol-assisted and mechanical treated groups were burning (5.22) and light sensitivity (5.46), respectively. Sixty-eight (82.9%) of all patients experienced postoperative pain, and in 52 (76.5%) of them, the time of pain onset was less than 2 hrs.

CONCLUSION

We found less pain and discomfort using alcohol-assisted technique compared with mechanical epithelial removal that was provided by a detailed pain and ocular discomfort symptoms assessment one day following PRK surgery.

Modulating Ocular Surface Pain Through Neurokinin-1 Receptor Blockade

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to test the role of substance P (SP) and its receptor neurokinin 1 (NK1R) on ocular surface pain.

Methods

Eight-week-old C57BL6/N (wild type [WT]) and B6.Cg-Tac1tm1Bbm/J (TAC1-KO) male mice were used. 5 M NaCl was topically applied on the cornea, followed by topical fosaprepitant 2, 10, and 50 mg/mL; 4 mg/mL oxybuprocaine chloride, or 0.1% diclofenac. Th eye wiping test was used to quantify ocular surface pain. SP content was quantified in the tear fluid and trigeminal ganglia (TG), and TAC1 mRNA was assessed in the cornea. Corneas were immunostained for β3-tubulin and NK1R, or CD45, to quantify leukocyte infiltration.

Results

TAC1-KO mice displayed a significant reduction of ocular pain (P < 0.001). Similarly, a single dose of 10 or 50 mg/mL fosaprepitant applied topically to WT mice reduced ocular pain as compared to vehicle (P < 0.001). Fosaprepitant 2 mg/mL, instead, induced corneal analgesia only when it was administered for 10 days, 6 times/day (P < 0.05). Diclofenac or oxybuprocaine reduced corneal nociception when compared to vehicle or fosaprepitant (P < 0.05). Fosaprepitant or oxybuprocaine groups showed lower SP content in tear secretions and TG (P < 0.05), and reduction in TAC1 mRNA (P < 0.05), and leukocyte infiltration (P < 0.05) in the cornea. Colocalization of NK1R and β3-tubulin was detected in mouse corneas.

Conclusions

Topical administration of the NK1R antagonist fosaprepitant effectively reduces ocular surface nociception by decreasing SP release in the tear fluid and TG, and corneal leukocyte infiltration. Fosaprepitant repurposing shows promise for the treatment of ocular pain.

Effect of Bandage Contact Lens Exchange on Pain and Healing After Photorefractive Keratectomy-A Randomized Control Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the corneal re-epithelialization and patient-perceived pain after bandage contact lens (BCL) exchange on day one, after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial, of all patients who underwent bilateral transepithelial-PRK (trans-PRK) or bilateral alcohol debridement and PRK (A-PRK), between March and October 2019. One eye of each patient was randomly assigned to BCL exchange on the first postoperative day (exchange group) and the BCL was not exchanged in the fellow eye (control group). Patients were evaluated daily until healing was complete. At each visit, the corneal epithelial defect was measured, and a questionnaire was used to assess pain, photophobia, and excessive tearing. P<0.05 was statistically significant.

RESULTS

The study sample was comprised of 56 patients (mean age 27.2±5.7 years). Trans-PRK was performed in 20 (34.5%) and A-PRK in 36 (64.3%) patients. At day 3, 40 (71.4%) eyes of the exchange group healed completely compared with 38 (67.9%) eyes of the control group (P=0.5). At day-1 follow-up, the pain score was 1.87±1.4 in the exchange group and 2.29±1.3 in the control group (P=0.009). The mean pain score was 1.58±1.4 among patients who underwent A-PRK and 2.35±1.2 among patients operated by trans-PRK (P=0.04).

CONCLUSION

The epithelial healing did not vary when BCL was exchanged one day after refractive surgery. However, postoperative pain score after PRK was lower at day 1, when the BCL was exchanged. Compared with A-PRK, trans-PRK group demonstrated a higher pain score in the early postoperative phase.

Cool Crosslinking: Riboflavin at 4°C for Pain Management After Crosslinking for Keratoconus Patients, A Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

To explore corneal cooling as a method of pain management in corneal-accelerated collagen cross-linking.

METHODS

This was a prospective and interventional randomized clinical trial registered in the National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials through the identifier NCT030760770. The research was conducted at the Institute of Ophthalmology "Conde de Valenciana." A total of 98 patients were randomly assigned to one of the following 2 groups: cold riboflavin (4°C) group or control group (riboflavin at room temperature). The inclusion criteria were patients of any sex, older than 18 years of age with keratoconus diagnosis who needed management with cross-linking in both eyes because of the evidence of progression. The exclusion criteria were patients who had cross-linking without epithelial debridement, unilateral cross-linking, or any other ocular pathologies besides keratoconus and any cognitive incapacity that would make the understanding of the pain test difficult. The main outcome measures were pain, tearing, photophobia, foreign body sensation, and irritation.

RESULTS

At 2 hours post-op, pain in the case and control groups was 3.80 ± 3.00 and 8.08 ± 2.21 (P < 0.05), tearing was 1.56 ± 1.96 and 8.29 ± 2.42 (P < 0.05), photophobia was 5.44 ± 3.57 and 7.83 ± 2.64 (P < 0.05), foreign body sensation was 2.20 ± 2.78 and 6.54 ± 2.73 (P < 0.05), and irritation was 3.48 ± 2.98 and 6.79 ± 3.00 (P < 0.05), respectively. A statistical significant difference was maintained in pain values on day 1 (2.79 ± 3.09 and 4.91 ± 3.27 [P < 0.05]), 2 (2.54 ± 2.41 and 4.00 ± 2.43 [P < 0.05]), and 4 (0.45 ± 0.76 and 1.22 ± 1.67 [P < 0.05]).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that pain and associated symptoms decreased significantly in the riboflavin 4°C group.

Corneal nerves anatomy, function, injury and regeneration

The cornea is a highly innervated tissue, exhibiting a complex nerve architecture, distribution, and structural organization. Significant contributions over the years have allowed us to come to the current understanding about the corneal nerves. Mechanical or chemical trauma, infections, surgical wounds, ocular or systemic comorbidities, can induce corneal neuroplastic changes. Consequently, a cascade of events involving the corneal wound healing, trophic functions, neural circuits, and the lacrimal products may interfere in the corneal homeostasis. Nerve physiology drew the attention of investigators due to the popularization of modern laser refractive surgery and the perception of the destructive potential of the excimer laser to the corneal nerve population. Nerve fiber loss can lead to symptoms that may impact the patient's quality of life, and impair the best-corrected vision, leading to patient and physician dissatisfaction. Therefore, there is a need to better understand preoperative signs of corneal nerve dysfunction, the postoperative mechanisms of nerve degeneration and recovery, aiming to achieve the most efficient way of treating nerve disorders related to diseases and refractive surgery.

Assessment of Factors Associated With Postoperative Pain After Photorefractive Keratectomy

PURPOSE

To define the factors that affect patient's self-assessed postoperative pain after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).

METHODS

Patients who underwent PRK in 2016 were evaluated. Anonymized data collected included patient gender, age, and season at the time of surgery, ablation depth, surgeon status (attending vs. resident), topical tetracaine use, and subjective pain scores at postoperative days (PODs) 1 and 7. Average pain scores and amount of pain medication taken were analyzed for each of the previously mentioned variables.

RESULTS

Overall, 231 patients who underwent PRK were analyzed. The mean pain score and SD were 0.78 ± 1.87 on POD 1 and 0.03 ± 0.37 by POD 7. Patients who used topical tetracaine reported significantly higher pain on POD 1 and 7 compared with patients who did not use tetracaine (P < 0.001 and P = 0.038, respectively). No significant differences in pain scores were seen based on surgeon status, ablation depth, gender, and season. Patients who used topical tetracaine took a higher amount of oral pain medication (9.44 ± 6.01) compared with those who did not (7.02 ± 4.71) (P = 0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative pain was significantly elevated in patients who used tetracaine on POD 1 and POD 7. These patients were also more likely to take oral pain medication than those who did not use topical tetracaine. Surgeon status, season, gender, and ablation depth showed no significant differences in subjective pain scores. Oral pain medication should be evaluated to assess efficacy and safety in inhibiting ocular pain after PRK.

Comparison of mechanical debridement and trans-epithelial myopic photorefractive keratectomy: A contralateral eye study

Purpose

To compare clinical outcomes between mechanical debridement photorefractive keratectomy (m-PRK) and trans-epithelial photorefractive keratectomy (t-PRK) in myopic patients.

Methods

Eighty eyes of 40 myopic patients with age between 18 and 55 years were included in this study. In each patient, one eye was randomly assigned for t-PRK, using the Amaris laser's ORK-CAM software and the other eye for m-PRK, using a spatula. Stromal ablation was done by Schwind Amaris 750S. Uncorrected and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), refractive outcomes, epithelial healing, pain, and discomfort were compared between the groups on day 1, 3, 7 and month 1, 3, and 6.

Results

Preoperative spherical equivalent (SE) were −3.97 ± 2.08 diopter (D) and −3.98 ± 2.06 D in m-PRK and t-PRK eyes, respectively (P = 0.981). Operation time was significantly shorter in the t-PRK group than m-PRK (P < 0.001). Postoperative pain was experienced significantly higher in the t-PRK group measured by 11-point numeric scale of pain questionnaire on the first postoperative day (P < 0.001). Photophobia, tearing, and vision fluctuation were also significantly higher in the t-PRK group postoperatively. However epithelial defect size and re-epithelialization time were lower in the t-PRK group (P = 0.012 and P < 0.001, respectively). Postoperative parameters including SE, uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and contrast acuity did not show any significant difference between the two groups during all intervals.

Conclusions

Although epithelial defect size and epithelial healing time were lower in t-PRK, postoperative pain, photophobia, and vision fluctuation were significantly less in the m-PRK group in the first postoperative days. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups after one week, and both mechanical and trans-epithelial techniques were shown to be safe and effective.