Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26429235›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2015

Thermal safety of ultrasound-enhanced ocular drug delivery: A modeling study.

Marjan Nabili, Craig Geist, Vesna Zderic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical physics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Novel Technique in Performing Ocular Ultrasound in Trauma: A Case Series.Clinical practice and cases in emergency medicine · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Modeling of Ultrasound Stimulation of Adolescent Pancreas for Insulin Release Therapy.Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Biomedical optics express · 2022
    Article
  10. Therapeutic Ultrasound for Topical Corneal Delivery of Macromolecules.Translational vision science & technology · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Hydrogel Biomaterials for Application in Ocular Drug Delivery.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marjan NabiliDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The George Washington University, 800 22nd Street NW, Room 5000, Washington, DC 20052.
Craig GeistDepartment of Ophthalmology, The George Washington University, 2150 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Floor 2A, Washington, DC 20037.
Vesna ZdericDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The George Washington University, 800 22nd Street NW, Room 6670, Washington, DC 20052.
George Washington University · US

Funding

NEI NIH HHS 5R21EY01873702
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDelivery of sufficient amounts of therapeutic drugs into the eye for treatment of various ocular diseases is often a challenging task. Ultrasound was shown to be effective in enhancing ocular drug delivery in the authors' previous in vitro and in vivo studies.

methodsThe study reported here was designed to investigate the safety of ultrasound application and its potential thermal effects in the eye using PZFlex modeling software. The safety limit in this study was set as a temperature increase of no more than 1.5 °C based on regulatory recommendations and previous experimental safety studies. Acoustic and thermal specifications of different human eye tissues were obtained from the published literature. The tissues of particular interest in this modeling safety study were cornea, lens, and the location of optic nerve in the posterior eye. Ultrasound application was modeled at frequencies of 400 kHz-1 MHz, intensities of 0.3-1 W/cm(2), and exposure duration of 5 min, which were the parameters used in the authors' previous drug delivery experiments. The baseline eye temperature was 37 °C.

resultsThe authors' results showed that the maximal tissue temperatures after 5 min of ultrasound application were 38, 39, 39.5, and 40 °C in the cornea, 39.5, 40, 42, and 43 °C in the center of the lens, and 37.5, 38.5, and 39 °C in the back of the eye (at the optic nerve location) at frequencies of 400, 600, 800 kHz, and 1 MHz, respectively.

conclusionsThe ocular temperatures reached at higher frequencies were considered unsafe based on current recommendations. At a frequency of 400 kHz and intensity of 0.8 W/cm(2) (parameters shown in the authors' previous in vivo studies to be optimal for ocular drug delivery), the temperature increase was small enough to be considered safe inside different ocular tissues. However, the impact of orbital bone and tissue perfusion should be included in future modeling efforts to determine the safety of this method in the whole orbit especially regarding potential adverse optic nerve heating at the location of the bone.

Indexed as

EyeModels, BiologicalSafetyTemperatureAnimalsDrug Delivery SystemsEye DiseasesHumansRabbitsSoftwareUltrasonic Waves

Identifiers

PMID26429235
PMCPMC4567579
OpenAlexW1948486505

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.