Topical pain control for corneal abrasions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Corneal abrasions are common ophthalmic presentations to emergency departments. Among emergency physicians and ophthalmologists, there are highly variable practice patterns with regard to management of resultant pain and discomfort. The goal of this study was to review and analyze the efficacy and safety of topical pain therapies for corneal abrasions, including topical anesthetics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), cycloplegics, steroids, pressure patching, and the use of a bandage contact lens (BCL).

METHODS

The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The protocol was established a priori and published on PROSPERO (CRD42020201288). MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Web of Science were searched until December 31, 2020. Primary studies comparing topical pain therapies to another therapy or control were included. Primary outcomes included percentage of corneal abrasions healed at 24, 48, and 72 hours, as well as pain control at 24 and 48 hours. Secondary outcomes included use of oral analgesia and incidence of complications. Risk of bias was assessed using validated tools. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

Overall, 33 studies (31 randomized controlled trials [RCTs], two cohort studies) comprising 4,167 patients with corneal abrasions were analyzed. Only the data for topical NSAIDs were of adequate evidence from which to draw conclusions; topical NSAIDs demonstrated significantly reduced pain scores at 24 hours (standardized mean differences [SMD] -0.69, 95% CI = -0.98 to -0.41) and 48 hours (SMD = -0.56, 95% CI = -1.02 to -0.10) as well as 53% (95% CI = 34% to 67%) lower oral analgesia use compared to control. Based on available data, topical anesthetics, cycloplegics, patching, and the use of a BCL did not result in any significant difference in pain scores or use of oral analgesia, while no studies examined topical steroids. No interventions resulted in healing delays or significantly higher rates of complications compared to controls.

CONCLUSIONS

There was strong evidence to support that topical NSAIDs reduce pain associated with corneal abrasions in the first 48 hours and the need for oral analgesia. The existing evidence was insufficient to support or refute the use of topical anesthetics, cycloplegics, steroids, or BCL for pain control in corneal abrasions. Pressure patching was ineffective at pain reduction and may increase the risk of complications. Delays in healing or other complications were not significantly different between any intervention or control for simple, uncomplicated corneal abrasions; however, larger RCTs are required to identify any differences in rare complications.

Traumatic Corneal Abrasion

Corneal abrasions can have potentially sight-threatening consequences if not accurately diagnosed and managed appropriately in the acute period. Simple corneal abrasions can be managed with antibiotic and tetanus prophylaxis, analgesia, and next-day follow up with ophthalmology. However, if there is any suspicion for penetrating eye injury, corneal ulcer, a sight-threatening infection such as bacterial keratitis, or ophthalmic zoster, an emergent referral is imperative. In this report, we present a case of classic corneal abrasion and discuss the acute management of this common problem.

Efficacy of Topical Analgesics in Pain Control for Corneal Abrasions: A Systematic Review

Corneal abrasions are one of the most common ocular injuries seen in the emergency department. While most patients with corneal abrasions complain of excruciating pain, permanent sequelae may develop if not managed properly. The use of topical antibiotics and other standards of treatment have greatly reduced the incidence of complications. However, there is still a lack of consensus regarding the proper management of pain in corneal abrasions. Proposed analgesics for the control of corneal abrasion pain include topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), topical anesthetics, and topical cycloplegics. For this review, ten published randomized controlled trials were identified, focusing on the efficacy and safety of different topical analgesics used in treating corneal abrasions.  Six of the trials focused on topical NSAIDs, three on topical anesthetics, and one on topical cycloplegics. There were mixed results regarding the efficacy of topical analgesics in reducing pain in patients with corneal abrasions. This review of the literature revealed that topical NSAIDs produced reductions in pain symptoms, whereas topical anesthetics and cycloplegics did not demonstrate significant improvements in either healing rates or pain control. Thus, this evidence supports the use of topical NSAIDs in the standard management of corneal abrasions. Unfortunately, the power of these studies is largely limited by small sample sizes. Larger studies must be conducted before topical analgesics can be recommended or discouraged for pain management in corneal abrasions. However, based on this review of the literature, the use of topical NSAIDs does not appear to complicate wound healing, and thus remains a safe option in patients desiring medical treatment.  

Ocular Complications in Laparoscopic Surgery: Review of Existing Literature and Possible Prevention and Treatment

During laparoscopic surgery, ocular complications are possible, sometimes leading to devastating visual losses, hardly susceptible to recovery, although rare. Principal ocular adverse events are represented by corneal abrasions and the perioperative visual loss (POVL). POVL onset is related to intraocular pressure elevations (particularly after patient positioning in Trendelenburg or prone decubitus, depending on the surgical procedure), anesthesiologic factors and patients' characteristics. In the light of evidence from the existing literature, the authors suggest surgical and anesthesiologic measures to prevent and manage ocular complications in laparoscopic surgery. Apart from general recommendations, this article indicates practical guidelines specific for robot-assisted laparoscopic interventions and spinal surgery, as well as laparoscopic colorectal resection, radical prostatectomy, and gynecologic surgery. In conclusion, in order to better manage these complications, it is advisable to develop an interdisciplinary collaboration between surgeons, anesthesiologists, and ophthalmologists, on a procedural and medico-legal level, with the intent of mutual training.