ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2016
A nonrandomized, open-label study to evaluate the effect of nasal stimulation on tear production in subjects with dry eye disease.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06525961 (A Single-center, Open-label, Single-arm Study to Evaluate the Effectiveness and Safety of Extra Nasal Neurostimulator in Patients With Dry Eye Disease Dissatisfied With Artificial Tears), which is not on this map. Cited by 26 papers.
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.
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.
A Single-center, Open-label, Single-arm Study to Evaluate the Effectiveness and Safety of Extra Nasal Neurostimulator in Patients With Dry Eye Disease Dissatisfied With Artificial Tears
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 60 citations in OpenAlex.
- Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of phase 3 clinical trial outcomes of OC-01 (varenicline solution) nasal spray and lifitegrast 5% ophthalmic solution for the treatment of dry eye disease.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2023Trial
- Efficacy of an Intranasal Tear Neurostimulator in Sjögren Syndrome Patients.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Trial
- Novel Extranasal Tear Stimulation: Pivotal Study Results.Translational vision science & technology · 2020Trial
- Randomized Controlled Crossover Trial Comparing the Impact of Sham or Intranasal Tear Neurostimulation on Conjunctival Goblet Cell Degranulation.American journal of ophthalmology · 2017Trial
- Beyond the Ocular Surface: Nasal Sensory Input as a Driver of Reflex Lacrimation in Dogs.Veterinary ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Cyclic extranasal neurostimulation for dry eye disease: a 4-week stimulation and 6-week intermission regimen based on neural adaptation dynamics.Eye and vision (London, England) · 2025Article
- Navigating the Dry Eye Therapeutic Puzzle: A Mechanism-Based Overview of Current Treatments.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Inflammation mechanism and anti-inflammatory therapy of dry eye.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Effectiveness of Intranasal Tear Neurostimulation for Treatment of Dry Eye Disease: A Meta-Analysis.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Article
- Quantum molecular resonance electrotherapy (Rexon-Eye) for recalcitrant dry eye in an Asian population.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Review
- A Single Administration of OC-01 (Varenicline Solution) Nasal Spray Induces Short-Term Alterations in Conjunctival Goblet Cells in Patients with Dry Eye Disease.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2022Article
- OC-01 (Varenicline Solution) Nasal Spray Demonstrates Consistency of Effect Regardless of Age, Race, Ethnicity, and Artificial Tear Use.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Article
- Effect of multivitamin drug on intractable dry eye symptoms.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Assessment and Management of Dry Eye Disease and Meibomian Gland Dysfunction: Providing a Singapore Framework.Asia-Pacific journal of ophthalmology (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2021Article
- Stimulating Tear Production: Spotlight on Neurostimulation.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Review
- Effectiveness of transcutaneous electrical stimulation combined with artificial tears for the treatment of dry eye: A randomized controlled trial.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2020Article
- Association of Ramadan daytime fasting with ocular surface inflammation and dry eye.International ophthalmology · 2019Article
- Chronic Electrical Stimulation for Tear Secretion: Lacrimal vs. anterior ethmoid nerve.The ocular surface · 2019Article
- Advances in dry eye disease treatment.Current opinion in ophthalmology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDry eye disease (DED), a chronic disorder affecting the tear film and lacrimal functional unit, is a widely prevalent condition associated with significant burden and unmet treatment needs. Since specific neural circuits play an important role in maintaining ocular surface health, microelectrical stimulation of these pathways could present a promising new approach to treating DED. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of nasal electrical stimulation in patients with DED.
methodsThis prospective, open-label, single-arm, nonrandomized pilot study included 40 patients with mild to severe DED. After undergoing two screening visits, enrolled subjects were provided with a nasal stimulation device and instructed to use it at home four times daily (or more often as needed). Follow-up assessments were conducted up to day 180. The primary efficacy endpoint was the difference between unstimulated and stimulated tear production quantified by Schirmer scores. Additional efficacy endpoints included change from baseline in corneal and conjunctival staining, symptoms evaluated on a Visual Analog Scale, and Ocular Surface Disease Index scores. Safety parameters included adverse event (AE) rates, visual acuity, intraocular pressure, slit-lamp biomicroscopy, indirect ophthalmoscopy, and endoscopic nasal examinations.
resultsMean stimulated Schirmer scores were significantly higher than the unstimulated scores at all visits, and corneal and conjunctival staining and symptom scores from baseline to day 180 were significantly reduced. No serious device-related AEs and nine nonserious AEs (three device-related) were reported. Intraocular pressure remained stable and most subjects showed little or no change in visual acuity at days 30 and 180. No significant findings from other clinical examinations were noted.
conclusionNeurostimulation of the nasolacrimal pathway is a safe and effective means of increasing tear production and reducing symptoms of dry eye in patients with DED.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.