ReviewFrontiers in medicine2026
The safety and effectiveness of anesthetic drops for intravitreal drug administration: a meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Intravitreal injections (IVI) are increasingly performed for the management of retinal diseases, yet procedural discomfort remains a common concern. Topical anesthetic drops are frequently used to mitigate pain, but evidence regarding their safety and efficacy compared with alternative anesthetic modalities, such as gels or subconjunctival injections, remains heterogeneous and limited. Objective: To systematically evaluate the safety and effectiveness of topical anesthetic drops for intravitreal drug administration, with a focus on patient-reported pain, procedural discomfort, and satisfaction compared with other anesthetic methods. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted through PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and other databases through October 2025. Eligible studies included clinical studies comparing topical anesthetic drops for IVI with other topical anesthetic agents. Results: Eight studies comprising 637 eyes were included. Topical anesthetic drops demonstrated analgesic efficacy comparable to anesthetic gels and subconjunctival anesthesia, with no statistically significant differences in post-injection pain (SMD -0.11, 95% CI; -0.27 to 0.05, Conclusion: Topical anesthetic drops are a safe, effective, and well-tolerated option for IVI, providing analgesia comparable to gels and subconjunctival anesthesia. Their rapid onset and ease of administration support their use as a first-line anesthetic strategy in routine clinical practice, particularly in high-volume injection settings. Further high-quality randomized trials are warranted to confirm these findings across diverse patient populations and clinical contexts.
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.