scholarly journals Pathogenic Mechanism of Dry Eye–Induced Chronic Ocular Pain and a Mechanism-Based Therapeutic Approach

2022 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 7
Author(s):  
Yuto Tei ◽  
Yoshinori Mikami ◽  
Masanori Ito ◽  
Taichiro Tomida ◽  
Daisuke Ohshima ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 250
Author(s):  
Hyeon Jeong Yoon ◽  
Jonghwa Kim ◽  
Jee Myung Yang ◽  
Edward T. Wei ◽  
Seong Jin Kim ◽  
...  

Background: Activation of TRPM8, a cold-sensing receptor located on the cornea and eyelid, has the potential to relieve the neuropathic ocular pain (NOP) in dry eye (DE) by inhibiting other aberrant nociceptive inputs. We aimed to investigate the effect of a topical TRPM8 agonist, cryosim-3 (C3), on relieving DE-associated NOP. Methods: We conducted a prospective pilot study of 15 patients with DE-associated NOP. These patients applied topical C3 to their eyelid, 4 times/day for 1 month. The patients underwent clinical examinations. They also completed the Ocular Pain Assessment Survey (OPAS), which is a validated questionnaire for NOP, at baseline, 1 week, and 1 month after treatment. Result: At 1 week, the OPAS scores of eye pain intensity, quality of life (driving/watching TV, general activity, sleep, and enjoying life/relations with other people), and associated factors (burning sensation, light sensitivity, and tearing) improved. The total OPAS scores of eye pain intensity, quality of life, and associated factors remained improved at 1 month. The Schirmer test scores also improved at 1 month. Conclusion: TRPM8 agonist (C3) could be a novel agent for treating patients with DE-associated NOP who are unresponsive to conventional treatments.


2018 ◽  
Vol 44 ◽  
pp. S307-S313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria S. Chang ◽  
Terri P. Rose ◽  
Carol L. Karp ◽  
Roy C. Levitt ◽  
Constantine Sarantopoulos ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 192-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerry P. Kalangara ◽  
Anat Galor ◽  
Roy C. Levitt ◽  
Derek B. Covington ◽  
Katherine T. McManus ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 305-311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew N. Siedlecki ◽  
Scott D. Smith ◽  
Adam R. Siedlecki ◽  
Salim M. Hayek ◽  
Rony R. Sayegh

Cornea ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 688-691 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohit Shetty ◽  
Kalyani Deshpande ◽  
Rashmi Deshmukh ◽  
Chaitra Jayadev ◽  
Rushad Shroff

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 310-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anat Galor ◽  
Derek Covington ◽  
Alexandra E. Levitt ◽  
Katherine T. McManus ◽  
Benjamin Seiden ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonghwa Kim ◽  
Hyeon Jeong Yoon ◽  
In Cheon You ◽  
Byung Yi Ko ◽  
Kyung Chul Yoon

Abstract Background: To compare the clinical characteristics of dry eye patients with ocular neuropathic pain features according to the types of sensitization based on the Ocular Pain Assessment Survey (OPAS).Methods: Cross-sectional study of 33 patients with dry eye and ocular neuropathic pain features. All patients had a comprehensive ophthalmic assessment including detailed history, the intensity and duration of ocular pain, the tear film, ocular surface, and Meibomian gland examination, and OPAS. Patients with <50% improvement in pain intensity after proparacaine challenge test were assigned to the central-dominant sensitization group (central group) and those with ≥50% improvement were assigned to the peripheral-dominant sensitization group (peripheral group). All variables were compared between the two groups.Results: No significant differences were observed in age, sex, underlying diseases, history of ocular surgery, duration of ocular pain, tear film, ocular surface and Meibomian gland parameters (all p>0.05). Ocular pain and non-ocular pain severity and the percentage of time spent thinking about non-ocular pain were significantly higher in the central group than in the peripheral group (all p<0.05). Central group complained more commonly of a burning sensation than did the peripheral group (p=0.01).Conclusions: Patients with central-dominant sensitization may experience more intense ocular and non-ocular pain than the others and burning sensation may be a key symptom in those patients.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 3765
Author(s):  
Hyeon-Jeong Yoon ◽  
Jonghwa Kim ◽  
Kyung Chul Yoon

Purpose: To investigate the response to gabapentin treatment in patients with dry eye (DE) accompanied by features of neuropathic ocular pain (NOP), and to analyze the differences between clinical manifestations of the groups according to treatment response. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 35 patients with DE accompanied by NOP features and obtained information on their medical history and previous ocular history. The patients underwent clinical examinations of the tear film, ocular surface, and meibomian gland and completed the Ocular Pain Assessment Survey (OPAS). One month after treatment with topical eye drops, add-on of gabapentin treatment was determined according to the Wong–Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale (WBFPS). A reduction of 2 points or more on the WBFPS was considered a positive treatment response. Enrolled patients were divided into three groups according to the treatment response: topical treatment response group (group 1, n = 11); gabapentin response group (group 2, n = 13); and gabapentin non-response group (group 3, n = 11). The medical history, clinical parameters, and OPAS scores were compared between groups. Results: The incidence of systemic comorbidities was higher in group 2 than in other groups. The corneal staining scores were lower in groups 2 and 3 than in group 1. Among the treatment response groups, group 2 showed improvements in OPAS scores of ocular pain severity, pain other than eyes, and quality of life, while group 1 showed improved OPAS scores of ocular pain severity and ocular associated factors. Group 2 exhibited lower scores of pains aggravated by mechanical and chemical stimuli than group 3. Conclusions: Gabapentin could be effective in patients who have systemic comorbidity and less pain evoked by mechanical and chemical stimuli for the treatment of DE patients with NOP, which is refractory to topical treatment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document