METHOD: This is prospective and randomized clinical trial. Our study population included 30 eyes undergoing pars plana vitrectomy that required near total corneal debridement intra-operatively for surgical view. We compared the residual wound and wound healing rate in between 3 groups: 10 diabetic eyes (DMV) on topical SH 0.18%; 10 diabetic eyes (DMC) and 10 non-diabetic eyes (NDM) not treated with topical SH 0.18%. The corneal epithelial wound was measured at 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72 and 120 h after the vitrectomy surgery.
RESULTS: DMC group had corneal wounds that reepithelialization significantly more slowly than in NDM and DMV groups at 12, 24, 36 and 48 h (Mann-Whitney test p wound and wound healing were detected in between NDM and DMV groups. The mean for epithelial closure in DMC group was delayed 87.6 ± 28.31 h, compared with DMV group (64.8 ± 21.31) and NDM group (56.4 ± 9.88). All groups were followed up 1 month beyond completed wound closure. No recurrent corneal epithelial wound, corneal melting or corneal neovascularization was noted.
CONCLUSION: Diabetic patients on SH 0.18% four times daily for epithelial defect had similar corneal wounds healing rate as non-diabetics. This treatment significantly improved corneal wound healing and accelerated complete corneal wound resurfacing in diabetic patients.
DESIGN: A double blind randomized controlled hospital-based study involving diabetic patients with postoperative corneal epithelial defect after vitreoretinal surgery.
METHODS: Diabetic patients were randomized to 3 different concentrations of topical insulin (DTI 0.5, DTI 1, and DTI 2) or placebo in the control group (DNS). Primary outcome measure was the rate of corneal epithelial wound healing (mm² per hour) over pre-set interval and time from baseline to minimum size of epithelial defect on fluorescein stained anterior segment digital camera photography. Secondary outcome measure was any adverse effect of topical insulin. Follow-up was 1 month.
RESULTS: Thirty-two eyes of 32 patients undergoing intraoperative corneal debridement with resultant epithelial defect (8 eyes per group) were analyzed. DTI 0.5 was superior to other concentrations achieving 100% healing rate within 72 hours of treatment compared with 62.5% in DNS, 75% in DTI 1, and 62.5% in DTI 2. Statistically, DTI 0.5 achieved significant results (P = 0.036) compared with the diabetic control group (DNS) in terms of mean rate of corneal epithelial wound healing from maximum to minimum defect size. No adverse effect of topical insulin was reported.
CONCLUSIONS: Topical insulin 0.5 units QID is most effective for healing corneal epithelial defect in diabetic patients after vitrectomy surgery compared with placebo and higher concentrations. Topical insulin is safe for human ocular usage.
DESIGN: A single-center, randomized controlled trial.
METHODS: A total of 132 patients with uncomplicated phacoemulsification were randomly allocated to the intervention or control group. The intervention group received postoperative eye patching for approximately 18 hours, whereas the control group received eye shield. The clear corneal incision architecture was examined postoperatively at 2 hours, 1 day, and 7 days after surgery using optical coherence tomography.
RESULTS: Epithelial gaping was significantly reduced on postoperative day 1 in the intervention group (52.4%) compared with control (74.2%) (P = 0.01). No differences were found for other architectural defects. Descemet membrane detachment was associated with lower intraocular pressure on postoperative day 7 (P = 0.02). Presence of underlying diabetes mellitus did not seem to influence architectural defects.
CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative eye patching facilitated epithelial healing and reduced the occurrence of epithelial gaping on postoperative day 1. It may play a role in protecting and improving corneal wounds during the critical immediate postoperative period.
METHODS: This is a double-blind randomized controlled hospital-based study involving diabetic patients with postoperative corneal epithelial defects after vitreoretinal surgery. Diabetic patients were randomized into 2 different groups and received either 0.5 units of topical insulin (DTI) or artificial tears (Vismed, sodium hyaluronate 0.18%; DAT). The primary outcome measured was the rate of corneal epithelial wound healing (mm 2 /h) over a preset interval and time from baseline to minimum size of epithelial defect on fluorescein-stained anterior segment digital camera photography. The secondary outcome measured was the safety of topical insulin 0.5 units and artificial tears (Vismed, sodium hyaluronate 0.18%). Patients were followed up until 3 months postoperation.
RESULTS: A total of 38 eyes from 38 patients undergoing intraoperative corneal debridement during vitreoretinal surgery with resultant epithelial defects (19 eyes per group) were analyzed. DTI was observed to have a significantly higher healing rate compared with the DAT group at rates over 36 hours ( P = 0.010), 48 hours ( P = 0.009), and 144 hours ( P = 0.009). The rate from baseline to closure was observed to be significantly higher in the DTI group (1.20 ± 0.29) (mm 2 /h) compared with the DAT group (0.78 ± 0.20) (mm 2 /h) as well ( P < 0.001). No adverse effect of topical insulin and artificial tears was reported.
CONCLUSIONS: Topical insulin (0.5 units, 4 times per day) is more effective compared with artificial tears (Vismed, sodium hyaluronate 0.18%, 4 times per day) for the healing of postoperative corneal epithelial defects induced during vitreoretinal surgery in diabetic patients, without any adverse events.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of EMT on the healing of pressure ulcers.
SEARCH METHODS: For this update we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 10 June 2015); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 6); Ovid MEDLINE (2014 to 10 June 2015); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, 10 June 2015); Ovid EMBASE (2014 to 10 June 2015); and EBSCO CINAHL (2014 to 6 July 2012).
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing EMT with sham EMT or other (standard) treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For this update two review authors independently scrutinised the results of the search to identify relevant RCTs and obtained full reports of potentially eligible studies. In previous versions of the review we made attempts to obtain missing data by contacting study authors. A second review author checked data extraction and disagreements were resolved after discussion between review authors.
MAIN RESULTS: We identified no new trials for this update.Two randomised controlled trials (RCTs), involving 60 participants, at unclear risk of bias were included in the original review. Both trials compared the use of EMT with sham EMT, although one of the trials included a third arm in which only standard therapy was applied. Neither study found a statistically significant difference in complete healing in people treated with EMT compared with those in the control group. In one trial that assessed percentage reduction in wound surface area, the difference between the two groups was reported to be statistically significant in favour of EMT. However, this result should be interpreted with caution as this is a small study and this finding may be due to chance. Additionally, the outcome, percentage reduction in wound area, is less clinically meaningful than complete healing.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results provide no strong evidence of benefit in using EMT to treat pressure ulcers. However, the possibility of a beneficial or harmful effect cannot be ruled out because there were only two included trials, both with methodological limitations and small numbers of participants. Further research is recommended.