眼用局部麻醉药治疗角膜擦伤:来自Cochrane系统综述和荟萃分析的结果。

IF 5.4 Q1 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Louis Leslie, Su-Hsun Liu, Irene C Kuo
{"title":"眼用局部麻醉药治疗角膜擦伤:来自Cochrane系统综述和荟萃分析的结果。","authors":"Louis Leslie, Su-Hsun Liu, Irene C Kuo","doi":"10.1038/s43856-025-00979-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite potential benefit, outpatient use of topical ophthalmic anesthetics can result in poor healing, infection, scar, and blindness. An unbiased analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is needed to examine their effectiveness and safety compared with placebo or other treatments for corneal abrasions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase.com, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched on February 10, 2023, without restriction on language or publication date. The published review protocol served as registration.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Systematic review and meta-analysis of nine RCTs describing 314 participants with post-traumatic abrasions and 242 participants with post-surgical abrasions, with a median study length of 7 days (interquartile range, 7-14), show no evidence of a difference in pain control between anesthetics and placebo at 24 h in post-trauma cases. Self-reported pain at 24 h is reduced with anesthetics plus topical nonsteroid anti-inflammatory drug in post-surgical participants (mean difference [MD], -5.72 on a 10-point scale; 95% CI, -7.35 to -4.09; 1 RCT; 30 participants) and at 48 h with anesthetics alone in post-trauma participants (MD, -5.68; 95% CI, -6.38 to -4.98; 1 RCT; 111 participants). Anesthetics are associated with 37% increased risk of non-healing defects (risk ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.78 to 2.42; 3 RCTs; 221 post-trauma participants). All evidence is of very low certainty. Over 50% of trials have an overall high risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Available evidence is insufficient to support outpatient use of topical anesthetics for corneal abrasions with respect to pain, re-epithelialization, and complication risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":72646,"journal":{"name":"Communications medicine","volume":"5 1","pages":"393"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12460648/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Topical ophthalmic anesthetics for corneal abrasions: findings from a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Louis Leslie, Su-Hsun Liu, Irene C Kuo\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s43856-025-00979-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite potential benefit, outpatient use of topical ophthalmic anesthetics can result in poor healing, infection, scar, and blindness. An unbiased analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is needed to examine their effectiveness and safety compared with placebo or other treatments for corneal abrasions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase.com, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched on February 10, 2023, without restriction on language or publication date. The published review protocol served as registration.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Systematic review and meta-analysis of nine RCTs describing 314 participants with post-traumatic abrasions and 242 participants with post-surgical abrasions, with a median study length of 7 days (interquartile range, 7-14), show no evidence of a difference in pain control between anesthetics and placebo at 24 h in post-trauma cases. Self-reported pain at 24 h is reduced with anesthetics plus topical nonsteroid anti-inflammatory drug in post-surgical participants (mean difference [MD], -5.72 on a 10-point scale; 95% CI, -7.35 to -4.09; 1 RCT; 30 participants) and at 48 h with anesthetics alone in post-trauma participants (MD, -5.68; 95% CI, -6.38 to -4.98; 1 RCT; 111 participants). Anesthetics are associated with 37% increased risk of non-healing defects (risk ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.78 to 2.42; 3 RCTs; 221 post-trauma participants). All evidence is of very low certainty. Over 50% of trials have an overall high risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Available evidence is insufficient to support outpatient use of topical anesthetics for corneal abrasions with respect to pain, re-epithelialization, and complication risk.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72646,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Communications medicine\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"393\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12460648/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Communications medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s43856-025-00979-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communications medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s43856-025-00979-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管有潜在的益处,门诊使用局部眼麻醉剂可能导致愈合不良、感染、疤痕和失明。需要对随机对照试验(rct)进行无偏分析,以检验其与安慰剂或其他治疗角膜擦伤的有效性和安全性。方法:在2023年2月10日检索Cochrane中央对照试验注册库、MEDLINE、Embase.com、拉丁美洲和加勒比健康科学、ClinicalTrials.gov和世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台,不受语言和发表日期的限制。已发表的评审方案作为注册。结果:系统回顾和荟萃分析了9项随机对照试验,其中包括314名创伤后擦伤患者和242名手术后擦伤患者,研究时间中位数为7天(四分位数范围为7-14),没有证据表明麻醉剂和安慰剂在创伤后24小时疼痛控制方面存在差异。术后患者使用麻醉剂加局部非甾体抗炎药24小时的自我报告疼痛减轻(10分制的平均差异[MD], -5.72; 95% CI, -7.35至-4.09;1项随机对照试验;30名受试者),创伤后患者单独使用麻醉剂48小时的自我报告疼痛减轻(MD, -5.68; 95% CI, -6.38至-4.98;1项随机对照试验;111名受试者)。麻醉药与不愈合缺陷风险增加37%相关(风险比1.37;95% CI 0.78 - 2.42; 3项随机对照试验;221名创伤后参与者)。所有证据的确定性都很低。超过50%的试验总体上存在高偏倚风险。结论:现有证据不足以支持门诊使用局部麻醉剂治疗角膜擦伤的疼痛、再上皮化和并发症风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Topical ophthalmic anesthetics for corneal abrasions: findings from a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Despite potential benefit, outpatient use of topical ophthalmic anesthetics can result in poor healing, infection, scar, and blindness. An unbiased analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is needed to examine their effectiveness and safety compared with placebo or other treatments for corneal abrasions.

Methods: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase.com, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched on February 10, 2023, without restriction on language or publication date. The published review protocol served as registration.

Results: Systematic review and meta-analysis of nine RCTs describing 314 participants with post-traumatic abrasions and 242 participants with post-surgical abrasions, with a median study length of 7 days (interquartile range, 7-14), show no evidence of a difference in pain control between anesthetics and placebo at 24 h in post-trauma cases. Self-reported pain at 24 h is reduced with anesthetics plus topical nonsteroid anti-inflammatory drug in post-surgical participants (mean difference [MD], -5.72 on a 10-point scale; 95% CI, -7.35 to -4.09; 1 RCT; 30 participants) and at 48 h with anesthetics alone in post-trauma participants (MD, -5.68; 95% CI, -6.38 to -4.98; 1 RCT; 111 participants). Anesthetics are associated with 37% increased risk of non-healing defects (risk ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.78 to 2.42; 3 RCTs; 221 post-trauma participants). All evidence is of very low certainty. Over 50% of trials have an overall high risk of bias.

Conclusions: Available evidence is insufficient to support outpatient use of topical anesthetics for corneal abrasions with respect to pain, re-epithelialization, and complication risk.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信