Subjective visual experience and pain level during phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation under topical anesthesia.

PURPOSE: To investigate the subjective visual experiences and pain during the phacoemulsification and intraocular lens (IOL) implantation under topical anesthesia, and whether these parameters change according to the stage of phacoemulsification cataract surgery. METHODS: Forty eyes of 40 patients with cataract undergoing phacoemulsification and IOL implantation under topical anesthesia were included in this study. The patients were told that they would be asked about their visual experiences and pain level, if any, during every stage of the surgery. As for degree of the pain, a 5-grade scale was used. The surgery was divided into 9 stages, i.e., clear corneal incision, continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis, side-port incisions at 3 and 9 o'clock positions, hydrodissection, nuclear rotation, phacoemulsification, bimanual irrigation and aspiration, IOL implantation, apposition of corneal incisions with stromal hydration. RESULTS: All subjects (100%) reported that they had seen some kind of light during the operation. Thirty-eight patients (95%) said that they had seen one or more colors. In 32 patients (80%), the light intensity decreased, and colors blurred significantly following the hydrodissection. As for the pain level during surgery, the overall pain score was found to be 0.40. The highest mean pain score was noted during IOL implantation stage followed by phacoemulsification and bimanual irrigation-aspiration. CONCLUSION: Topical anesthesia is both a safe and effective method for small-incision clear corneal phacoemulsification cataract surgery. Patients may experience visual sensations, and the pain felt during the operation is low and tolerable. Visual experiences and pain level may change according to the stage of phacoemulsification cataract surgery

and intraocular lens implantation under topical anesthesia

Purpose: To investigate the subjective visual experiences and pain during the phacoemulsification and intraocular lens (IOL) implantation under topical anesthesia, and whether these parameters change according to the stage of phacoemulsification cataract surgery. Methods: Forty eyes of 40 patients with cataract undergoing phacoemulsification and IOL implantation under topical anesthesia were included in this study. The patients were told that they would be asked about their visual experiences and pain level, if any, during every stage of the surgery. As for degree of the pain, a 5-grade scale was used. The surgery was divided into 9 stages, i.e., clear corneal incision, continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis, side-port incisions at 3 and 9 o'clock positions, hydrodissection, nuclear rotation, phacoemulsification, bimanual irrigation and aspiration, IOL implantation, apposition of corneal incisions with stromal hydration. Results: All subjects (100%) reported that they had seen some kind of light during the operation. Thirty-eight patients (95%) said that they had seen one or more colors. In 32 patients (80%), the light intensity decreased, and colors blurred significantly following the hydrodissection. As for the pain level during surgery, the overall pain score was found to be 0.40. The highest mean pain score was noted during IOL implantation stage followed by phacoemulsification and bimanual irrigation-aspiration. Conclusion: Topical anesthesia is both a safe and effective method for small-incision clear corneal phacoemulsification cataract surgery. Patients may experience visual sensations, and the pain felt during the operation is low and tolerable. Visual experiences and pain level may change according to the stage of phacoemulsification cataract surgery. Copyright (C) 2003 S. Karger AG, Basel

tromethamine in the treatment of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis

Purpose: To compare the therapeutic effects of two ophthalmic solutions (0.1% olopatadine hydrochloride and 0.5% ketorolac tromethamine) with different pharmacological mechanisms on the clinical signs and Symptoms of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis (SAC).Methods: Forty patients with the signs and symptoms of SAC (i.e. hyperaemia, itching, mucus discharge, tearing) were included in this placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel group, single centre study. In group 1 (20 patients) one eye of each patient was treated with olopatadine and the other with placebo. In group 2 (20 patients) one eye of each patient was treated with ketorolac solution and the other with placebo. The principal signs and symptoms of SAC (hyperaemia and itching) were evaluated at 30 mins and at 2, 7 and 15 days.Results: In group 1, both parameters improved significantly in eyes treated with olopatadine compared with those receiving placebo at all control examinations (all p 0.05). However, the itching score was significantly lower in the olopatadine group from the second day through to the end of the study (p < 0.05).Conclusions: Both olopatadine and ketorolac ophthalmic solutions were found to be effective in alleviating the clinical signs and symptoms of SAC compared to placebo. However, olopatadine reduces ocular itching significantly more than ketorolac

Comparative study of 0.1% olopatadine hydrochloride and 0.5% ketorolac tromethamine in the treatment of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis.

PURPOSE: To compare the therapeutic effects of two ophthalmic solutions (0.1% olopatadine hydrochloride and 0.5% ketorolac tromethamine) with different pharmacological mechanisms on the clinical signs and Symptoms of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis (SAC). METHODS: Forty patients with the signs and symptoms of SAC (i.e. hyperaemia, itching, mucus discharge, tearing) were included in this placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel group, single centre study. In group 1 (20 patients) one eye of each patient was treated with olopatadine and the other with placebo. In group 2 (20 patients) one eye of each patient was treated with ketorolac solution and the other with placebo. The principal signs and symptoms of SAC (hyperaemia and itching) were evaluated at 30 mins and at 2, 7 and 15 days. RESULTS: In group 1, both parameters improved significantly in eyes treated with olopatadine compared with those receiving placebo at all control examinations (all p 0.05). However, the itching score was significantly lower in the olopatadine group from the second day through to the end of the study (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both olopatadine and ketorolac ophthalmic solutions were found to be effective in alleviating the clinical signs and symptoms of SAC compared to placebo. However, olopatadine reduces ocular itching significantly more than ketorolac