Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Mar 2:15:953-971.
doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S294227. eCollection 2021.

Comparison of Pain Scores Among Patients Undergoing Conventional and Novel Panretinal Photocoagulation for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review

Affiliations
Review

Comparison of Pain Scores Among Patients Undergoing Conventional and Novel Panretinal Photocoagulation for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review

Corrina P Azarcon et al. Clin Ophthalmol. .

Abstract

Purpose: To summarize key findings from a systematic review focusing on pain as an adverse outcome of panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) among patients with diabetic retinopathy.

Design: Systematic review.

Methods: We systematically searched articles in major databases from July to September 2020. Studies that compared pain outcomes of PRP among diabetic patients who underwent conventional single-spot laser (SSL), conventional multi-spot laser (MSL), and/or novel navigated laser (NNL) were included. The Cochrane RoB 2 tool and ROBINS-I tool were used to evaluate the risk of bias of the included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs), respectively.

Results: We included 13 RCTs and 4 CCTs. Thirteen studies were included for Comparison 1 (Conventional SSL versus Conventional MSL), 3 studies were included for Comparison 2 (NNL versus Conventional MSL), and 3 studies were included for Comparison 3 (NNL versus Conventional SSL). A total of 783 patients and 1961 eyes were included in this review. The review showed that NNL yielded the lowest pain scores, followed by conventional MSL, then by conventional SSL.

Conclusion: This review summarizes findings of multiple studies that reported pain as an adverse outcome of PRP among patients with advanced diabetic retinopathy. Data from RCTs with mostly some concerns for bias (RoB 2 tool) and CCTs with mostly moderate risk of bias (ROBINS-I tool) show benefit of using MSL over SSL, and NNL over conventional systems for PRP in diabetic retinopathy, considering pain as the primary outcome.

Keywords: NAVILAS®; PASCAL®; diabetic retinopathy; pain; panretinal photocoagulation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest for this work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Search yield.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Risk of bias assessment of included RCTs.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Risk of bias assessment of included CCTs.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Forest plot comparing conventional MSL and conventional SSL.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Forest plot comparing NNL and conventional MSL (Pulse duration: 30-ms).
Figure 6
Figure 6
Forest plot comparing long-pulse NNL and conventional SSL (pulse duration: 100-ms).

References

    1. Atlas D. International Diabetes Federation. IDF Diabetes Atlas; 2019.
    1. Duh EJ, Sun JK, Stitt AW. Diabetic retinopathy: current understanding, mechanisms, and treatment strategies. JCI Insight. 2017;2(14):e93751. doi:10.1172/jci.insight.93751 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Schwartz SS, Epstein S, Corkey BE, et al. A unified pathophysiological construct of diabetes and its complications. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2017;28(9):645–655. doi:10.1016/j.tem.2017.05.005 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Leasher JL, Bourne RRA, Flaxman SR, et al. Global estimates on the number of people blind or visually impaired by diabetic retinopathy: a meta-analysis from 1990 to 2010. Diabetes Care. 2016;39:1643–1649. doi:10.2337/dc15-2171 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sinclair SH, Schwartz SS. Diabetic retinopathy – an underdiagnosed and undertreated inflammatory, neuro-vascular complication of diabetes. Front Endocrinol. 2019;10:843. doi:10.3389/fendo.2019.00843 - DOI - PMC - PubMed