SEARCH · PubMed Health
Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Neurologists should be aware of the following causes of eye pain: (1)ocular and orbital disorders with or without visible pathology of the eye (eg,redness, corneal opacity, or proptosis); (2) ophthalmologic syndromes associated with headache; and (3) headache syndromes associated with ophthalmologic findings.
Debilitating ocular pain poses a significant challenge to the ophthalmologist. When the pain is intractable and the eye has very poor vision and is disfigured, surgical removal of the eye has traditionally been the definitive treatment of choice. Because many people are uncomfortable psychologically with removal of their eye, however painful, and other patients are not good surgical candidates, an alternative to enucleation is sometimes warranted, and injection of a neurolytic substance can often induce long-lasting anesthesia for a blind painful eye. This article reviews a range of options for management of blind painful eye from anesthesia to enucleation.
PURPOSE: Phthisis bulbi results from different ocular conditions. We evaluated intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide as a treatment option in blind painful eyes. METHODS: Thirty-one patients with unilateral phthisis were randomly divided into two groups. Group A received 0.3 ml (12.5 mg) triamcinolone acetonide intravitreally and Group B 0.3 ml balanced salt solution after retrobulbar anesthesia. Treatment success was assessed by subjective response to pain and clinically by biomicroscopic evaluation of conjunctival congestion. Tonometry was done before and after treatment. Follow-ups were at 24 hours, 3 weeks, 3 and 6 months, and 1 and 2 years. RESULTS: Throughout the two-year follow-up, only two patients in Group A reported pain after the procedure and were retreated, one at week 4 and the other at week 7. Conjunctival congestion was significantly lower in Group A. Two patients with hypotony before treatment had normal tension after triamcinolone. All Group B patients were reinjected with triamcinolone because pain continued after balanced salt solution injection. No severe complications were found. CONCLUSIONS: Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide may be effective and safe for treating blind painful eyes.
Transitory eye pain occurred during sleep in a 62 year-old patient, who complained of being often awoken during the second half of the night. Diurnal ophthalmologic examinations did not reveal any abnormality. Three consecutive nocturnal polysomnographic recordings were performed to determine whether these pain crises were related to any sleep stage. The patient woke up three times during the recordings because of the usual pain occurrence. On the three occasions, the crisis occurred during of immediately after a REM sleep phase. The brievity of the pain episode (4 to 5 min) did not allow a quick eye pressure measurement to demonstrate a possible increase in ocular tension. However, the role of the REM sleep myosis and vegetative manifestations are discussed regarding the determination of eye pain.
Eye pain with or without associated head or face pain is a common complaint to the ophthalmologist. The ocular exam may reveal the etiology (e.g., corneal disease, angle closure glaucoma) but typically the exam is normal. This paper reviews the evaluation and management of eye pain with a "normal" ocular exam, including: 1) subtle findings on ocular exam; 2) transient findings on exam, and 3) no abnormal ocular findings. Ophthalmologists should be aware of the various etiologies for eye pain and the specific and distinctive features that make the diagnosis.
We studied 39 blind painful eyes in 39 patients who were treated with retrobulbar injection of absolute (96%) alcohol for their severe ocular pain at the King Khaled Eye Specialist Hospital from January 1984 to January 1987. There were 21 (54%) male and 18 (46%) female patients; all were followed for at least three months. The protracted ocular pain was mainly due to: end-stage (absolute) glaucoma in 31 (80%) eyes, uveitis or endophthalmitis in four (10%) eyes, or corneal ulcer in two (5%) eyes. One eye had painful phthisis bulbi, and one eye had infraorbital neuralgia. The complications encountered were transient and included blepharoptosis in eight (21%) eyes, external ophthalmoplegia, and corneal epithelial defect. The effective time of the injection to relieve pain ranged from two weeks to two years (mean, 29 weeks). The authors believe that there is still a place for retrobulbar alcohol injection for blind painful eyes when enucleation or evisceration is not possible.
PURPOSE: To assess subjective levels of eye pain, nausea, and sedation following vitreoretinal surgery performed with intravenous sedation and retrobulbar anesthesia. METHODS: One hundred eighty-five consecutive patients who underwent vitreoretinal surgery and had access to a standard postoperative analgesic regimen prospectively quantified levels of eye pain, nausea, and sedation 2 hours and 5 hours after surgery by using a standard visual analog scale. Analgesic requests were recorded. Responses were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: Fifty-six percent of patients had some eye pain after vitreoretinal surgery; 48% of patients requested an analgesic within 5 hours after surgery. Twenty-seven percent of patients required narcotic analgesia. There was a significant relationship between the presence of eye pain and surgery duration of >2 hours (P < 0.02). Sixteen percent of patients had postoperative nausea, which more likely occurred in those who received a narcotic analgesic (P < 0.02). Eighty percent of patients had postoperative sedation, which more likely occurred in those who received a narcotic analgesic (P < 0.02). CONCLUSION: One half of individuals undergoing vitreoretinal surgery, especially those who have lengthy procedures (>2 hours), will request pain medication within 5 hours after surgery; one half of these patients will need narcotic analgesia for pain control. Narcotics may result in nausea and sedation.
BACKGROUND: Few cases of malignant tumors arising in a blind painful eye have previously been described. We described two cases of a blind painful eye containing an unsuspected tumor, which were enucleated to relieve the pain. CASE PRESENTATIONS: Case 1: A 57 year-old Caucasian man presented with recurrent orbital cellulitis and endophthalmitis in the left eye (OS). The OS was blind and painful and an enucleation was performed showing a uveal melanoma by histopathological exam. Case 2: A 54 year-old Caucasian man with previous history of a rhegmatogenous retinal detachment in his left eye presented a blind painful eye. Enucleation was performed revealing a well-differentiated B-cell lymphoma of uveal tract with extra ocular extension. CONCLUSION: In the management of a blind painful eye, it is extremely important to rule out an intraocular malignancy particularly in those patients who have not been followed by an ophthalmologist.
PURPOSE: To determine the demographics and results of treatment in patients undergoing enucleation of blind, painful eyes. METHODS: Medical records were reviewed to determine the precipitating cause, preoperative symptoms, prior therapy, and results of treatment in 58 patients in whom enucleation was performed to relieve ocular discomfort. Patient perception of symptoms and treatment was assessed by a follow-up mail survey. RESULTS: Forty-five percent of patients had sustained prior trauma. Ocular discomfort was attributed to phthisis (43%), elevated intraocular pressure (40%), or corneal decompensation (10%). Preoperative symptoms included ocular pain (91%), periocular headache (17%), tearing (26%), and ipsilateral photophobia (26%). Eight patients experienced contralateral photophobia. Enucleation provided complete symptomatic relief in 54 patients (93%). Two of the four patients with persistent discomfort experienced painful facial paresthesias, attributed to prior retrobulbar alcohol injections. Ninety-one percent of the 32 patients who completed the follow-up survey reported pain relief after surgery, whereas 94% would recommend enucleation to others with blind, painful eyes. CONCLUSIONS: Trauma is the most common precipitating condition in patients undergoing enucleation of blind, painful eyes. These patients experience a variety of symptoms, including ocular pain, facial pain or paresthesias, tearing, and photophobia. Contralateral photophobia is not uncommon. Enucleation is highly effective in relieving these symptoms and should be considered in patients unresponsive to topical therapy. Facial paresthesias in patients who have received prior retrobulbar alcohol injections are not relieved by enucleation.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Retrobulbar phenol injection was used as a neurolytic to manage blind chronically painful eyes in ten patients. The cause of the blind painful eye was absolute glaucoma in eight of the ten eyes. We used 1.5mL of 1:15 (6.7%) aqueous phenol solution in each case. None of the patients experienced any pain from the injection. Seven patients obtained complete pain relief after the procedure, and one patient had some improvement. We found a range of duration of pain relief of 4.5 to 48 months (mean, 15 months), which compares favorably with retrobulbar alcohol injection. We believe retrobulbar phenol injection is preferable to alcohol. It has the advantage of being less painful during injection because of its local anesthetic properties.
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of one intraoperative dose of intravenous ketorolac tromethamine to saline placebo in controlling postoperative eye pain, nausea, and sedation following vitreoretinal surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. METHODS: One hundred fourteen vitreoretinal surgical patients were randomized over a 7-month period to a single intraoperative intravenous dose of ketorolac tromethamine or placebo. All patients underwent surgery with intravenous sedation and retrobulbar anesthetic injection and had access to a standard postoperative analgesic regimen. After 2 and 5 hours, eye pain, nausea, and sedation levels were recorded using a standard visual analog scale. Analgesic requirements were tabulated. RESULTS: Patients given ketorolac were significantly less likely to have postoperative eye pain than were placebo-treated patients (P = 0.0043). Fewer ketorolac patients required postoperative analgesia than placebo patients did (P < 0.0001). Four ketorolac patients (7%) required a narcotic compared to 11 placebo patients (20%) (P < 0.0001). Fewer ketorolac patients experienced nausea and sedation than placebo patients did, but this difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Ketorolac tromethamine is an effective nonnarcotic choice for postoperative pain control following vitreoretinal surgery. Pain control is particularly important in this group of patients, whose compliance with postoperative procedures and positioning may significantly affect surgical outcome.
When a patient presents to a medical practitioner with a painful eye, the initial history is extremely valuable in determining the cause of the complaint. The patient should be questioned specifically about the onset and duration of symptoms; description of the pain; exacerbating and mitigating factors; associated pruritus, discharge, or photophobia; and any previous occurrences. It is important to inquire about the patient's past medical history, past ocular history (including surgeries, trauma, contact lens wear, and family history of glaucoma), systemic and ocular medications, and allergies. A careful examination of the patient's skin, face, eyelids, conjunctiva, sclera, cornea, and anterior chamber should be performed. In this article, the authors describe a variety of external diseases and anterior segment causes of a painful eye, many of which can be diagnosed from the initial history. The article works systematically, beginning externally with the eyelids and conjunctiva and progressing internally toward the cornea and anterior chamber.
A 63-year-old woman presented with the acute onset of right eye pain. Ophthalmic and neurologic examinations were normal except for a loud right carotid bruit. Directional Doppler examination suggested a critical stenosis of the internal carotid artery. Subsequent arteriography revealed a 95% stenosis. The eye pain ceased following carotid endarterectomy.
Several notifications of eye pain and blurred vision associated with treatment with nifedipine were received by New Zealand's Intensive Medicines Monitoring Programme. A questionnaire survey of patients taking nifedipine was undertaken to test the importance of these associations, with disturbance of taste associated with captopril taken as a methodological control. Altogether 961 patients taking nifedipine and 368 taking captopril were sent a questionnaire that asked whether any eye problems and changes in the sense of taste had occurred while they were taking the drug and whether these had resolved after treatment was stopped. Compliance was high: of 922 and 343 questionnaires that were assumed to have been delivered to patients taking nifedipine and captopril, respectively, 770 (84%) and 295 (86%) were returned satisfactorily completed. The distribution of sex was comparable in the two groups; patients taking captopril were slightly younger. Eye symptoms were reported in both groups, but eye pain was significantly more common in patients taking nifedipine (107 (14%) compared with 26 (9%) patients taking captopril). This is a new finding and may be related to ocular vasodilatation. Theoretically, glaucoma is a possible adverse reaction. Loss of taste was significantly associated with captopril, but no other disturbances of taste showed significant associations. Loss of taste persisted in 27 out of 35 patients who continued to take captopril and in three out of eight patients when the drug was withdrawn. This study showed a method of assessing early signs of adverse drug reactions, which has been used once before and identified previously unrecognised reactions.
A 24 year old man presented with a painful eye that had been treated empirically with steroid drops. The case is presented to illustrate that before prescribing steroid eye drops, a definitive diagnosis must be reached and this often requires the services of an ophthalmologist.
PURPOSE: To report the efficacy of primary retrobulbar chlorpromazine injections for the management of blind and seeing painful eyes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective case series from three university hospitals was done. Twenty eyes of 20 patients with at least 3 months of follow-up are reported. Ten of these 20 eyes did not receive any other ophthalmic medications either 2 weeks before chlorpromazine injection or at any time point after injection. Treatment was considered successful if pain control lasted for at least 3 months, without the need for reinjection or enucleation. RESULTS: Sixteen of 20 (80.0%) eyes achieved successful pain control. There were no permanent complications in any patient. CONCLUSIONS: Retrobulbar chlorpromazine appears to be safe and effective for the management of pain in blind eyes.