Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34901466›Full record

ReviewBMJ open ophthalmology2021

Pain mechanisms and management in corneal cross-linking: a review.

Emilie Sophie van der Valk Bouman, Heather Pump, David Borsook, Boris Severinsky, Robert Pl Wisse, Hajirah N Saeed, Eric A Moulton

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ open ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04439552 (Neuroplasticity of Pain Pathways and Corneal Afferent Regeneration Following Corneal Crosslinking), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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.

NCT04439552 recruitingnot on this map

Neuroplasticity of Pain Pathways and Corneal Afferent Regeneration Following Corneal Crosslinking (CXL) in Keratoconus

TypeobservationalSponsorBoston Children's HospitalRan2021 to 2027Enrolled60ConditionsPain, Postoperative, Pain, Chronic, Pain, Acute, Surgical Injury
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Emilie Sophie van der Valk BoumanDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7807-4390
Heather PumpBoston University, Brighton, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2448-9712
David BorsookBrain and Eye Pain Imaging Lab, Pain and Affective Neuroscience Center, Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Boston Childrens Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Boris SeverinskyDepartment of Ophthalmology, Emory Eye Center, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Robert Pl WisseDepartment of Ophthalmology, Univerisity Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Hajirah N SaeedDepartment of Ophthalmology, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Eric A MoultonBrain and Eye Pain Imaging Lab, Pain and Affective Neuroscience Center, Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine; Department of Ophthalmology, Boston Childrens Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7959-8441
Boston Children's Hospital · USUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLBoston University · USEmory Eye Center · USMassachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Though corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) is an increasingly available and effective treatment for keratoconus, few reports have considered its impact on pain-related physiology in depth. This comprehensive narrative review summarises mechanisms underlying pain in CXL and clinical care possibilities, with the goal of future improvement in management of CXL-related pain. Postoperative pain associated with CXL is largely due to primary afferent nerve injury and, to a smaller extent, inflammation. Chronification of pain after CXL has not been reported, even as long-term nerve damage without regeneration following standard CXL treatment is frequently observed. The lack of pain chronification may be due to the minimally invasive nature of the procedure, with its rapidly recovering superficial corneal wound, and to the positive anti-inflammatory changes of the tear film that have been described after CXL. Different CXL approaches have been developed, with the transepithelial epithelial-on technique (epi-on) associated with less postsurgical pain than the gold standard, epithelial-off technique (epi-off). After the first few days, however, the difference in pain scores and need for analgesics between epi-on and epi-off disappear. Patients experience relatively high-intensity pain the first few days post-CXL, and many strategies for acute pain control following CXL have been studied. Currently, no method of pain management is considered superior or universally accepted. Acute pain following CXL is a recognised and clinically significant side effect, but few CXL studies have systematically investigated postoperative pain and its management. This review aims to improve patient pain outcomes following this increasingly common procedure.

Indexed as

corneaocular surfacetreatment otherwound healing

Identifiers

PMID34901466
PMCPMC8633999
OpenAlexW3215608886

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.