Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34431901›Full record

ArticleArquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia2021

Pain response and symptoms in photorefractive keratectomy: mechanical de-epithelization compared with transepithelial ablation.

Priscila Rymer, Bernardo Kaplan Moscovici, Rachel Gomes, Braulio Couto, Paulo Schor, Mauro Campos

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Priscila RymerDepartamento de Oftalmologia, Escola Paulista e Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Bernardo Kaplan MoscoviciDepartamento de Oftalmologia, Escola Paulista e Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-4441-4304
Rachel GomesDepartamento de Oftalmologia, Escola Paulista e Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Braulio CoutoUniversidade de Belo Horizonte, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Paulo SchorDepartamento de Oftalmologia, Escola Paulista e Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-3999-4706
Mauro CamposDepartamento de Oftalmologia, Escola Paulista e Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Universidade Federal de São Paulo · BRCentro Universitário de Belo Horizonte · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare postoperative pain and discomfort between mechanical and transepithelial photorefractive keratectomies.

methodsThis prospective comparative study included 190 eyes of 95 patients with hyperopia (up to +4.00 D), astigmatism (up to -5.00 D), and myopia (up to -8.00 D) who underwent mechanical photorefractive keratectomy in one eye and transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy in the contralateral eye using Wavelight Allegretto EX500 excimer laser. The patients were unaware of the side treated with each technique. The interval between operations in the same patient was 15-30 days. Both eyes had similar refraction before surgery, with a maximum of 15-µm difference in ablation. Postoperative questionnaires were administered on days 1 and 7 to assess the patients' level of discomfort (0=no discomfort to 5=extreme discomfort) with the following symptoms: pain, burning sensation, itchiness, tearing, photophobia, eye redness, foreign body sensation, and eyelid swelling. Patients were also asked about which method they preferred.

resultsThe sample consisted of 61 women (64.21%) and 34 men (35.79%). The mean (SD) patient age was 31.66 (6.69) years (range, 22-54 years). On postoperative day 1, the patients reported significantly less discomfort in terms of pain (1.9 ± 1.74 vs 2.5 ± 1.83; p=0.017), burning sensation (1.8 ± 1.56 vs 2.5 ± 1.68; p=0.004), tearing (2.3 ± 1.71 vs 3.1 ± 1.69; p=0.001), and foreign body sensation (1.9 ± 1.77 vs 2.5 ± 1.86; p=0.024) in the eye that received mechanical photorefractive keratectomy than in the eye that received transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy. No significant differences were found between the mechanical and transepithelial photorefractive keratectomies on postoperative day 7. Fifty-nine patients (62.10%) preferred mechanical photorefractive keratectomy, while 32 (33.68%) preferred transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy. Four patients (4.22%) expressed no preference.

conclusionsOur results showed that pain scores were significantly lower in the mechanical photorefractive keratectomy-treated eyes than in the transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy-treated eyes on postoperative day 1, which may have provided greater patient comfort after surgery and led patients to prefer the mechanical photorefractive keratectomy technique.

Indexed as

Foreign BodiesPhotorefractive KeratectomyAdultFemaleHumansLasers, ExcimerMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative PainProspective StudiesRefraction, OcularYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID34431901
PMCPMC11826575
OpenAlexW3195089258

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.