Skip to main content
Download PDF

Comparison of pain between bilateral ICL surgeries in patients with myopia

BMC Ophthalmology volume 24, Article number: 175 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to compare the preoperative anxiety, aqueous humor monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) concentration, intraoperative pain, and degree of cooperation of the first eye implantable collamer lens (ICL) surgery with the second eye surgery, of the 1-day interval group with the 1-week interval group, and to investigate the possible causes of these differences, as well as to determine the appropriate interval between bilateral eye ICL surgeries.

Method

The study was a prospective observational study. A total of 120 patients who underwent bilateral ICL surgery at the Department of Ophthalmology, West China Fourth Hospital, Sichuan University, from July to September 2023, were enrolled. The patients were divided into a 1-day interval group and a 1-week interval group. The ICL surgery was performed on both eyes according to the schedule. Anxiety levels, aqueous humor MCP1, cooperativeness, surgical time, pain and satisfaction, and patients’ estimations of the time spent in the operation were recorded for each eye. The patients were instructed to recall the intraoperative pain of the first eye surgery after the operation of the second eye. Statistical analyses (two independent samples t-test,two paired samples t-test, the rank-sum test, the chi-square test, non-parametric test with multiple independent samples) were performed to compare the differences between each score in both eyes and two groups. Furthermore, we examined the relationship between pain levels and the reproductive history of the patients.

Results

In the 1-day interval group, male/female is 22/52, average age is 25.24±5.00. In the 1-week interval group, male/female is 17/29, average age is 25.39±5.57. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. In both groups, patients were less nervous, had significantly more pain, had less surgical satisfaction, had a longer estimated operative time, and had elevated preoperative MCP1 during the second eye operation. In the second eye surgery, the patient’s cooperation worsened, but it did not lead to an increase in surgical time. A significant proportion of patients, particularly in the 1-week interval group, recalled experiencing reduced pain during the first eye surgery. The 1-week interval group had a higher difference in all indicators between the bilateral surgeries. In the second eye surgery, patients in the 1-week interval group experienced more severe pain, less cooperation, longer estimated operation duration, and a greater MCP1 than those in the 1-day interval group.

Conclusion

Patients undergoing second eye ICL surgery had decreased nervousness, increased pain, decreased cooperation, and satisfaction, and increased MCP1 compared to the first eye surgery. It is recommended that an interval of about one week should be avoided between bilateral surgeries when developing a surgical schedule to improve patients’ cooperation, satisfaction, and comfort.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

With the widespread use of devices such as mobile phones and tablets, the prevalence of myopia is increasing. Researchers estimate that in 30 years, the global myopia prevalence will reach nearly 50%, while high myopia prevalence will reach nearly 10% [1]. Currently, keratorefractive laser surgery is the mainstream method for treating myopia, but some patients are not suitable for the surgery due to their corneal conditions. There are also disadvantages, such as poor visual quality, poor predictability and irreversibility [2]. Implantable collamer lens (ICL) surgery is an effective method for treating myopia [3, 4]. It is a posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens that is a safe and effective surgical option for the correction of moderate to high myopia. It overcomes some of keratorefractive laser surgery’s limitations (unsuitable for too thin corneas and too high myopia) and is less constrained by corneal conditions and refractive power [5]. It also has advantages such as reversibility, less dry eye, fewer corneal complications, and better visual quality. Patients who undergo bilateral ICL surgery often complain about more pain after the second surgery in our clinical practice. Even though both eye surgeries are performed by the same physician, with the same anesthesia method, surgical instruments, and artificial lens implanted. Previous studies on cataract surgery have suggested that patients with bilateral cataracts often complain about more pain in the second eye surgery [6,7,8,9]. However, quantitative data on whether the second eye ICL surgery is more painful is currently lacking. MCP1, a new research area, has been shown to be an important cause of surgical pain. Previous studies on pain of cataract surgery have noted a positive correlation between MCP1 concentration in aqueous humor and pain of the surgery. In our study, we recorded the preoperative anxiety level, intraoperative pain, cooperation level, and surgical time, MCP-1 in patients who underwent bilateral ICL surgery to determine if the second eye surgery was more painful than the first and to investigate the underlying cause. Previous studies on cataracts have noted that the interval between binocular surgeries affects the pain of the second eye surgery. The association between the interval between bilateral procedures and the pain level during the second eye surgery was also explored to guide the interval selection.

Data and methods

General information and grouping

The study was a prospective observational study. 120 patients (39 males, 81 females) who underwent bilateral ICL surgery at West China Fourth Hospital of Sichuan University from July to September 2023 were enrolled. The Inclusion criteria: Adult myopic patients with indications [10, 11] for surgery in both eyes(the patient has the desire to improve the refractive status, and has a reasonable expectation of surgical efficacy;18-45 years old; patients with myopia or combined astigmatism; relative stability of refractive error, i.e. change in refractive error ≤0.50D per year for 2 consecutive years; corneal endothelium count ≥2000/mm2 with stable cell morphology; depth of the anterior chamber ≥2.80mm and the angle of chamber is open), Mentally and psychologically normal ,Voluntary enrollment in this study. The exclusion criteria: Low ocular pain threshold(hyperalgesia, a heightened sensation of pain in response to a normal analgesic stimulus. Physical examination reveals an increased response to stimuli, e.g., finger pressure ,hot and cold stimuli, pinpricks can lead to significant and severe pain.), poor communication and comprehension, and cognitive abnormalities, Other ocular problems such as iritis, retinal fissure, and previous surgical history in the inner eye ,Corneal endothelium and anterior chamber depth did not meet ICL surgery needs(corneal endothelium ≥2000/mm2, anterior chamber depth ≥2.80mm),Severe refractive media clouding such as corneal leucoma, cataract and so on ,Serious complications during the perioperative period such as intraocular infection, lens damage, or intraocular hemorrhage ,Serious systemic diseases such as diabetes, systemic immune system diseases and so on. This study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of West China Fourth Hospital of Sichuan University (Registration number: HXSY-EC-2023040). All patients and their families agreed to participate and signed the written informed consent. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Surgical intervals are based on the participant's wishes. Participants can choose from 1-day or 1-week intervals between bilateral eye surgeries. This is the protocol used during the daily clinical practice. The data of patients who underwent bilateral ICL surgery were divided into two groups: 1 group had second eye surgery with a 1-day interval (74 people), and the other with a 1-week interval (46 people). The first eye surgery was conducted on more visually impaired eye.

Surgical methods

Levofloxacin hydrochloride (0.5%, Santen) was used to dot both eyes 1 day before surgery. Pupils were dilated with compound tropicamide(1ml:5mg, Santen) 1 hour before surgery. Oxybuprocaine hydrochloride(20ml:80mg, Santen) eye drops were given 10 min before surgery. After flushing the conjunctival sac during the surgery, the operated eye was supplemented with 1–2 drops of oxybuprocaine hydrochloride. If an astigmatism ICL lens was to be implanted, corneal limbal marking was performed on the morning of surgery using a 4.5-gauge needle and a slit lamp.

ICL V4c lenses were implanted in the eyes of every participant. Standard disinfection was performed during the surgery, and the surgical eye was exposed. A 2.75 mm incision was made at the upper corneal limbus, and the ICL was loaded onto a specialized injector, injected, and unfolded through the corneal incision. A viscoelastic substance (1.7%, Bausch Lomb)was injected into the anterior chamber, and the ICL position was adjusted behind the iris using a positioning hook. Lens positioning markers had to align precisely with corneal limbus markers for toric lenses. The viscoelastic agent was then removed completely. After the pupil reduction by carbachol injection(1ml:0.1mg, Bausch Lomb), the incision was closed with an aqueous solution. The conjunctival sac was coated with tobramycin dexamethasone eye ointment(tobramycin 0.3%, dexamethasone 0.1%,Alcon), and the operated eye was covered with sterile dressings. All procedures were conducted by the same ICL specialist.

Evaluation indicators

General information

Age, gender, education level score (primary school: 0 points; junior high school: 1 point; high school: 2 points; junior college: 3 points; undergraduate: 4 points; master: 5 points; doctor and above 6 points), childbearing for females (childlessness, cesarean birth, and normal delivery).

Preoperative anxiety level

The visual analog scale (VAS) anxiety scale was used to evaluate this before surgery. A 10 cm long horizontal line was drawn on paper; the left side of the line was zero (without any anxiety), and the right side was ten (extreme anxiety). The scale indicated increasing anxiety in order from left to right. In the surgical waiting room, the patient was instructed to point out the anxiety position on the horizontal line based on their inner feelings [12].

Pain

After surgery, pain indicators were collected using the VAS pain scale, similar to the VAS anxiety scale [13, 14].

Estimated operative time

The patient was asked to estimate the duration of the intraoperative period to assess the patient's self-perceived pain and anxiety.

Intraoperative cooperation and surgical time

The patient was extremely cooperative: 0 points; the patient was cooperative, but with occasional eye closure: 1 point; the patient was relatively cooperative, with eye rotation and eye closure: 2 points; and the patient was poorly cooperative, with head movement, eye closure, and eye rotation: 3 points. The intraoperative time taken (from the time the patient's eye was exposed to the ophthalmic microsurgical instruments to the time the patch was removed at the end of the procedure) was also recorded.

Patient satisfaction

It was measured by the VAS scale, following the same method as before.

MCP-1 level

About 100-200ul aqueous humor samples from the anterior chamber via the transparent corneal incision were obtained by 1ml injection syringe during first-eye and second eye surgery. Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay(ELISA) was used to measure MCP-1 concentration. All procedures were conducted under the instructions of the ELISA kit (Germany, Millipore). The specific steps were as follows: after incubating the sample with the captured antibody-coupled magnetic beads for 30 min, the samples were washed three times in the washing station. Then, the biotinylated detected antibody was added to each well and incubated in the dark for 1 h. Captured analytes were detected by adding streptavidin-phycoerythrin. Milliplex Analyte (5.1.0.0)was employed for the analysis.

Statistical methods

SPSS V 19.0 (IBM) was used for statistical analyses. If the data conformed to a normal distribution, two independent samples t-test was applied for comparison between groups, and two paired samples t-test was applied for comparison between the two eyes within the group (age, time consumed in surgery, preoperative tension, satisfaction, estimated time of surgery, and MCP1). Otherwise, the rank-sum test was applied (intra-operative cooperation level, level of pain and recalled level of pain in the first eye, educational level). The chi-square test was used for gender. A non-parametric test with multiple independent samples was used for females to explore the relationship between fertility status and pain. The value of p less than 0.05 indicated a statistically significant difference.

Results

Baseline characteristics

This study included a total of 120 patients (39 males and 81 females). In the 1-day interval group, male/female is 22/52,average age is 25.24±5.00. In the 1-week interval group, male/female is 17/29,average age is 25.39±5.57.The comparison between the two groups showed no statistical differences in demographic data and the indicator of the first eye between the two groups. The baseline of the two groups was consistent. See Table 1.

Table 1 Baseline data of patients
Full size table

Preoperative anxiety level

The anxiety scores of the first eye in the 1-day interval group and the 1-week interval group were 3.42±1.99 and 3.65±1.82, respectively, with no statistical difference between the two groups. The anxiety levels of the second eye decreased in both groups, reaching 2.80±1.81 and 2.89±1.68, respectively, showing statistical differences compared to the first eye. There was no statistical difference between second eye in the two groups. See Table 2.

Table 2 Comparison of characteristics between 1st and 2nd eye ICL surgery
Full size table

Pain level

The pain score of the first eye in the 1-day interval group was 2 (1,2), and in the 1-week interval group was 1 (1,3). The pain level of the second eye increased in both groups to 2 (1,4) and 3 (2,4.5) separately, which was statistically different from the first eye. The pain level of the second eye was statistically greater in the 1-week interval group than in the other group. See Table 2.

Intraoperative cooperation and surgical time

The scores of cooperation in the first eye surgery were 0 (0,1) in both groups, rising to 1 (0,1) in the second eye surgery in the 1-day interval group and 1 (0.2) in the 1-week interval group. There was a statistically significant difference between the two eyes in both groups. The second eye cooperation in the 1-week interval group was significantly worse than that in the 1-day interval group, with a statistically significant difference. The surgical time of the first eye in the two groups was 8.80±1.49 and 8.87±1.64 respectively, and for the second eye, it was 8.91±1.39 and 9.13±1.67 respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of surgical time and between bilateral surgical time in both groups. See Table 2.

Satisfaction

The satisfaction of the first eye surgery in the two groups was 8.39±1.52 and 8.22±1.65, respectively. The satisfaction of the second eye decreased to a score of 7.55±1.84 in the 1-day interval group and 7.20±1.95 in the 1-week interval group. There was no statistical difference between the two groups. The scores were statistically different between bilateral surgeries in both groups. See Table 2.

Estimated surgical duration

The estimated surgical time consumed in the first eye surgery was 4.82 ± 1.98 and 4.76 ± 2.05 in two groups separately. There was no statistical difference between the two groups. The estimated duration of the second eye surgery was longer, with a statistically significant difference in both groups. In the 1-day interval group, it was 5.65±2.59; in the 1-week interval group, it was 6.76±2.44. The estimated duration of the second eye surgery in the 1-week interval group was longer than that in the 1-day interval group, and the difference was statistically significant. See Table 2.

Recalled pain of the first eye surgery

When evaluating the pain during the second eye surgery, the examinee was asked to recall the pain level from the first surgery to ascertain if memory loss occurred. The recalled pain score of the first eye in the 1-day interval group was 1 (1,2), and in the 1-week interval group was 1 (0.2). Both were lower than the actual pain score of the first eye. There was a statistical difference between the recalled and actual pain in the 1-week interval group. The two groups also had a statistically significant difference in recalled pain. The 1-week interval group was more inclined to underestimate the level of pain in the first eye. See Table 3.

Table 3 Comparison of actual pain and recalled pain in the first eye surgery
Full size table

MCP-1 levels

Preoperative MCP-1 levels in the first eye were not statistically different between the two groups. The MCP-1 level in the second eye was higher than that in the first eye in both groups, and the difference was statistically significant in the 1-week interval group. The MCP-1 level in the second eye in the 1-week interval group was higher than that in the 1-day interval group, with a statistically significant difference.

Relationship between general information and pain

Depending on whether the women gave birth or not, they were divided into the childless group (53 people ), the cesarean section group (20 people) and the normal delivery group (8 people). The result of the Kruskal-Wallis test was H = 33.943, p < 0.001, which indicates a difference in pain level among the three groups of patients. After a two-by-two comparison, there was a difference in pain level between the childless group and the cesarean section group (test statistic=29.976,adjusted p<0.001), between the childless group and the normal delivery group(test statistic=33.664,adjusted p<0.001). However, there was no difference between the normal birth group and cesarean section groups(test statistic=3.688,adjusted p=1.000).

Adverse reactions

The main adverse reactions were temporary corneal edema and transient high intraocular pressure. No serious adverse reactions such as intraocular infection, lens damage, or intraocular hemorrhage occurred.

Discussion

With the improvement of ICL surgical equipment and techniques, patients who undergo the surgery are increasingly concerned about their experience and satisfaction. ICL surgery generally uses topical anesthesia, which is fast, efficient, inexpensive, and can reduce the risk of nerve damage and respiratory depression [15,16,17,18]. Although superficial anesthetics are becoming increasingly varied and analgesic, achieving a pain-free intraoperative experience remains difficult. Pain decreases satisfaction and makes them less cooperative during the surgery, which not only affects the operator's operation but also increases the risk of the surgery. Some studies have found that patients with binocular cataracts have worse cooperation in the second eye surgery [19].

In previous studies on cataract surgery, it has been found that the second eye surgery is more painful [20, 21]. However, other studies have also shown no significant difference in pain perception between the two eyes [22, 23]. The VAS method can quickly and effectively assess patients' satisfaction, pain, and anxiety levels [24]. It takes less than a minute to evaluate once. Numerous previous studies have evaluated patients' intraoperative pain on the first day after surgery and found no significant difference between the degree of pain in both eyes [25]. However, we assessed the intraoperative pain of patients shortly following surgery, which is more accurate.

The results of our study showed that during the second eye surgery, the level of anxiety reduced, the level of pain increased, satisfaction decreased, and the estimated surgery time was prolonged in both groups. In the second eye surgery, the level of patients' cooperation decreased, but it did not increase the duration of the surgery. When asked to recollect the discomfort of the first eye operation, most patients, especially those with a 1-week interval, continue to underestimate the pain.

Pain is a somatic perception or psychological state related to physiological injury and is the integration of physiological and psychological aspects. In the bilateral surgery performed by the same surgeon, the sensation of pain should be similar [21]. There are two possible reasons why ICL surgery on the second eye is more painful: physiological and psychological factors. Physiological factors: Inflammation may be a contributing factor to pain [26]. A study pointed out that in patients undergoing bilateral cataract surgery, certain cytokines, such as MCP1 in the second eye, were significantly elevated after surgery in the first eye [27], suggesting that surgery in one eye may cause an inflammatory response similar to sympathetic uveitis in the other eye. In cataract surgery, JiangL et al. found a positive correlation between pain and MCP-1 concentration in the aqueous humor [28]. Moreover, the analgesic drug may cause pharmacological tolerance. URsea et al. anticipated that the patient's tolerance to the anesthetic administered during the first eye surgery would render the anesthesia ineffective during the second eye surgery, increasing discomfort [6]. Psychological factors: previous studies have found that the level of intraoperative pain is related to the patient's mental state [29, 30]. In preparation for the first eye surgery, most patients are nervous and anxious, anticipating a high pain level. A certain degree of preoperative tension and anxiety can raise the patient's sensory threshold [31] and cooperation. During the surgery, patients doesn’t feel as painful as they expect so they feel that the first eye surgery is not particularly painful and have high satisfaction. When the second eye ICL surgery is performed, the patients are already familiar with the surgical procedure, the level of anxiety and tension has decreased [32], and the patients anticipate a relaxing and painless surgical experience. If the intraoperative experience was found to be inconsistent with their expectations, they experienced more pain and had less satisfaction [9, 31, 33]. This is consistent with our findings that patients were less nervous, less cooperative and had higher pain levels and lower satisfaction, longer estimated surgical time during the second eye surgery. Furthermore, the patient's monocular vision improved immediately after the first eye surgery, resulting in higher expectations for the second eye. If they experience some pain during the operation, they believe the anesthesia was not as effective as in the first surgery, leading to more pain, less satisfaction, and poorer cooperation [34, 35]. Lastly, by the time a patient undergoes a second eye surgery, the agony of the first eye surgery has been forgotten. Patients tend to compare the more intense pain they just experienced with the lower pain in their memory, thus resulting in more pain [7].This is consistent with our finding that a significant proportion of patients underestimated the pain in the first eye and that the longer the interval between two eyes was, the more obvious the forgetting was.

Currently, there are few studies analyzing whether the interval between bilateral surgeries affects the degree of pain. Our study found statistically significant differences between the two groups' second eye regarding estimated surgical duration, MCP1, cooperation, pain, and recalled pain of the first eye. The group with a 1-week interval had more pronounced pain, poorer cooperation, and longer estimated surgical time in the second eye surgery, suggesting that 1-week intervals should be avoided if possible. 1-week interval group also had a tendency to underestimate and forget the pain experienced during the first eye surgery following the procedure on their second eye.

Our study used ELISA to detect the concentration of MCP-1 in the aqueous humor of patients and analyzed the correlation between intervals and the expression level of MCP-1 in the contralateral eye. Previous studies have reported that the worsening pain in the second eye may be related to sympathetic uveitis caused by changes in inflammatory factors [36]. MCP-1 is the most important factor causing pain [37]. This factor exerts biological activity by binding it to its specific receptor, CCR2. Studies have found that blocking MCP-1 or its homologous receptor CCR2, as well as knocking out the CCR2 gene in mice, can alleviate pain after nerve injury [38]. Research has found that the level of MCP-1 in the aqueous humor significantly increases after surgery on the first eye [27, 38]. Our results show that the preoperative levels of MCP-1 in the second eye in both groups were higher than those in the first eye. This difference was statistically significant in the 1-week interval group. The MCP1 level in the second eye in the 1-week interval group was higher than that in the 1-day interval group, with a statistically significant difference. Previous study has reported that delayed immune responses may cause an increase in inflammatory factors after a certain period [39]. Our outcome is consistent with previous studies. Previous study has reported that the levels of TNF-α and IL-1β increase significantly after surgery on the first eye, which can serve as predictive factors for pain [40,41,42].

According to other clinical studies, there is a significant difference in pain tolerance before and after childbirth (especially vaginal delivery) for women. The difference in pain tolerance between younger women (who have not given birth) and older women (who have given birth naturally ) may not be due to age but may be related to childbirth history. Our study found that the childless group had the highest level of intraoperative pain, and the difference was statistically significant. The lowest pain level was found in the normal delivery group, and the middle level was found in the cesarean section group. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. This finding suggests that childbearing, especially normal delivery, may increase pain tolerance. However, additional research is required to determine if childbearing or age contributes to the effect and to determine the precise mechanism.

The shortcomings of our study: First, the sample size was small, with a higher proportion of female patients, which may have affected the accuracy of the study. Second, the interval between the two eye surgeries was divided into two groups without further grouping. Third, except for certain objective indicators, this study mainly focused on the subjective experience of patients, which introduces a certain level of subjectivity.

Conclusions

In summary, the patient's anxiety decreased, the pain level increased, satisfaction decreased, cooperation worsened, and aqueous humor MCP1 increased following the second eye ICL surgery. The difference in the 1-week interval group was more significant than that in the 1-day interval group. Patients' intraoperative pain and tension can influence ophthalmic surgery more than other surgeries [43, 44] and are related to the success of surgery [21, 45, 46]. Currently, many studies are discussing how to control these psychological factors [47, 48]. Preoperative evaluation and education of patients can reduce intraoperative pain and minimize surgical risks [28]. It is recommended to provide psychological intervention before the second eye surgery, informing the patient in advance that the second eye is more painful and giving them a certain level of tension [49]. Additional intraoperative anesthesia can be considered in some patients. To improve patients' cooperation, satisfaction, and comfort, we recommend avoiding a 1-week interval when planning the surgical schedule.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

ICL:

Implantable Collamer Lens

VAS:

Visual Analogue Scale

MCP-1:

Monocyte chemoattractant protein-1

ELISA:

Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay

M:

Male

F:

Female

R:

Right eye

L:

Left eye

References

  1. Dong YH. Global prevalence of myopia and high myopia and temporal trends from 2000 through 2050. Chinese Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2017;51(4):294.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Xu YC, Yang XJ, et al. Application and evaluation of a quality of life scale for Chinese people with refractive correction. Chinese J Exp Ophthalmol. 2007;25(8):623–6.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cao X, Tong J, Wang Y, Zhou T, Ye B, Li X, Shen Y. Long-term ultrasound biomicroscopy observation of position changes of a copolymer posterior chamber phakic intraocularlens. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery. 2014;40(9):1454–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Wan B, Li DH, Luo Y, Li Y. Lens vault changes and associated factors after implantation of implantable collamer lenses with central flow. Journal of Otolaryngology and Ophthalmology of Shandong University. 2020;34(2):36–41.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Moshirfar M, Somani AN, Vaidyanathan U, Sumsion JS, Barnes JR, Ronquillo YC. Comparison of FDA-Reported Visual and Refractive Outcomes of the Toric ICL Lens, SMILE, and Topography-Guided LASIK for the Correction of Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism. J Refract Surg. 2019;35(11):699–706.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ursea R, Feng MT, Zhou M, Lien V, Loeb R. Pain perception in sequential cataract surgery: Comparison of first and second procedures. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery. 2011;37(6):1009–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hari-Kovacs A, Lovas P, Facsko A, Crate ID. Is second eye phacoemulsification really more painful? Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift. 2012;124((15-16):516–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Tan CSH, Fam HB, Heng WJ, Lee HM, Saw SM, Au Eong KG. Analgesic effect of supplemental intracameral lidocaine during phacoemulsification under topical anaesthesia: a randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Ophthalmology. 2011;95(6):837–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Yu JG, Ye T, Huang Q, Feng YF, Wang J, Fu XA, Xiang Y. Comparison between Subjective Sensations during First and Second Phacoemulsification Eye Surgeries in Patients with Bilateral Cataract. Journal of Ophthalmology. 2016;1:1–6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Price MO Jr, FWP. Evaluation of the toric implantable collamer lens for simultaneous treatment of myopia and astigmatism. Expert Review of Medical Devices. 2015;12(1):25–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Chen X, Wang XY. Development of posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens implantation. J Ophthalmol Otorhinolaryngol. 2016;16(2):125–9.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kindler CH, Harms C, Amsler F, Ihde-Scholl T, Scheidegger D. The visual analog scale allows effective measurement of preoperative anxiety and detection of patients’ anesthetic concerns. Anesthesia & Analgesia. 2000;90(3):706–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Rosas S, PacO M, Lemos C, Pinho T. Comparison between the Visual Analog Scale and the Numerical Rating Scale in the perception of esthetics and pain. Int Orthod. 2017;15(4):543–60.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Millar K, Jelicic M, Bonke B, Asbury AJ. Assessment of preoperative anxiety: comparison of measures in patients awaiting surgery for breast cancer. Br J Anaesth. 1995;74(2):180–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Eke T, Thompson JR. Serious complications of local anaesthesia for cataract surgery: a 1 year national survey in the United Kingdom. Br J Ophthalmol. 2007;91(4):470–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Guerrier G, Rondet S, Hallal D, Levy J, Bourdon H, Brezin AP, Samama CM. Risk factors for intraoperative hypertension in patients undergoing cataract surgery under topical anaesthesia. Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine. 2016;35(5):343–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sarkar S, Mondal KK, Roy SS, Gayen S, Ghosh A, De Raman R. Comparison of preoperative nepafenac (0.1%) and flurbiprofen (0.03%) eye drops in maintaining mydriasis during small incision cataract surgery in patients with senile cataract: A randomized, double-blind study. Indian J Pharmacol. 2015;47(5):491–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Oğurel T, Oğurel R, Onaran Z, Örnek K. 0.1% Nepafenac reduces pain and increases patient comfort during cataract surgery. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2018;41(5):448–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ji QS, Sun SQ, Wen YC. Comparison of pain experience and compatibility between consecutive surgeries in patients with bilateral cataract. Anhui Med Pharmaceut J. 2017;21(7):1209–10.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Akkaya S, Özkurt YB, Aksoy S, Kökçen HK. Differences in pain experience and cooperation between consecutive surgeries in patients undergoing phacoemulsification. International Ophthalmology. 2017;37(3):545–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bardocci A, Ciucci F, Lofoco G, Perdicaro S, Lischetti A. Pain during second eye cataract surgery under topical anesthesia: an intraindividual study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2011;249(10):1511–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sharma NS, Ooi JL, Figueira EC, Rosenberg ML, Masselos K, Papalkar DP, Paramanathan N, Francis IC, Alexander SL, Ferch NI. Patient perceptions of second eye clear corneal cataract surgery using assisted topical anaesthesia. Eye. 2008;22(4):547–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Omulecki W, Laudańska-Olszewska I, Synder A. Factors affecting patient cooperation and level of pain perception during phacoemulsification in topical and intracameral anesthesia. European Journal of Ophthalmology. 2009;19(6):977–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Pastor-Vivas AI, Alejandre-Alba N, García-Vega MI, Ariño-Gutiérrez M, García-Sandoval B, Jiménez-Alfaro I. Quantifying and classifying postsurgical pain in pterygium surgery with conjunctival autografts. Archivos de la Sociedad Espanola de Oftalmologia. 2011;86(6):176–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Li X, He Y, Su T, Tian Y, Wang Y, Xia X, Song W. Comparison of clinical outcomes between cystotome-assisted prechop phacoemulsification surgery and conventional phacoemulsification surgery for hard nucleus cataracts: A CONSORT-compliant article. Medicine. 2018;97(46): e13124.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Strong JA, Xie W, Coyle DE, Zhang JM. Microarray Analysis of Rat Sensory Ganglia after Local Inflammation Implicates Novel Cytokines in Pain. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(7):e40779.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Zhu XJ, Wolff D, Zhang KK, He WW, Zhou P. Inflammation in the Contralateral Eye After Cataract Surgery in the First Eye. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015;56(9):5566–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Jiang L, Zhang KK, He WW, Zhu XJ, Zhou P. Perceived Pain during Cataract Surgery with Topical Anesthesia: A Comparison between First-Eye and Second-Eye Surgery. J Ophthalmol. 2015;2015:383456. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/383456.

  29. Piper BJ, DeKeuster RM, Beals ML, Cobb CM, Burchman CA, Perkinson L, Lynn ST, Nichols SD, Abess AT. Substitution of medical cannabis for pharmaceutical agents for pain, anxiety, and sleep. Journal of Psychopharmacology. 2017;31(5):569–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hudson BF, Ogden J, Whiteley MS. Randomized controlled trial to compare the effect of simple distraction interventions on pain and anxiety experienced during conscious surgery. Eur J Pain. 2015;19(10):1447–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Adatia FA, Munro M, Jivraj I, Ajani A, Braga-Mele R. Documenting the subjective patient experience of first versus second cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015;41(1):116–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Nijkamp MD, Ruiter RAC, Roeling M, van den Borne B, Hiddema F, Hendrikse F, Nuijts RMMA. Factors related to fear in patients undergoing cataract surgery: a qualitative study focusing on factors associated with fear and reassurance among patients who need to undergo cataract surgery. Patient Education and Counseling. 2002;47(3):265–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ang CL, Eong KGA, Lee SSG, Chan SP, Tan CSH. Patients’ expectation and experience of visual sensations during phacoemulsification under topical anaesthesia. Eye. 2007;21(9):1162–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Nijkamp MD, Kenens CA, Dijker AJ, Ruiter RA, Hiddema F, Nuijts RM. Determinants of surgery related anxiety in cataract patients. British Journal of Ophthalmology. 2004;88(10):1310–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Foggitt PS. Anxiety in cataract surgery: pilot study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001;27(10):1651–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Liu P. The affecting factors of pain in patients having bilateral cataract surgery and the appropriate time for having the second eye surgery. PhD thesis. Army Medical University. 2019.

  37. Zhang F, Nie LL, Zhao MS. lnfIammatory cytokines research progress on the increase of pain during the second eye cataract surgery.International. Int J Ophthalmol. 2017;17(2):247–50.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Zhang F, Wang JH, Zhao MS. Dynamic monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 level as predictors of perceived pain during first and second phacoemulsification eye surgeries in patients with bilateral cataract. BMC Ophthalmology. 2021;21(1):133.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Kawai M, Inoue T, Inatani M, Tsuboi N, Shobayashi K, Matsukawa A, Yoshida A, Tanihara H. Elevated levels of monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 in the aqueous humor after phacoemulsification. Invest Ophthalmol Vis. 2012;53(13):7951–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Yang R, Liu C, Yu D, Ma L, Zhang Y, Zhao S. Correlation between Hyperalgesia and Upregulation of TNF- α and IL-1 β in Aqueous Humor and Blood in Second Eye Phacoemulsification: Clinical and Experimental Investigation. J Immunol Res. 2021;2021:7377685.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Huang XP, Chen TM. Changes of IL-1 β,IL-6 and TNF-αlevels in tears of cataract patients after surgery and their value in predicting clinical adverse events. Clin Med. 2021;41(10):23–6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Yu D. The relationship between hyperalgesia of second eye after phacoemulsification and changes of TNF-α and IL-1β. PhD thesis. Tianjin Medical University. 2020.

  43. Mota HD. Pseudomonas aeruginosa-induced bilateral endophthalmitis after bilateral simultaneous cataract surgery: case report. Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia. 2018;81(4):339–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Hsu CR, Chen JT, Yeh KM, Hsu CK, Tai MC, Chen YJ, Chang YH. A cluster of nontuberculous mycobacterial endophthalmitis (NTME) cases after cataract surgery: clinical features and treatment outcomes. Eye (Lond). 2018;32(9):1504–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Tan CSH, Chan JC, Ngo WK, Cheong KX. Pain during dominant-side or nondominant-side phacoemulsification. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery. 2014;40(7):1249–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Aslankurt M, Aslan L, Başkan AM, Aksoy A, Silay E, Yıldız H. Pain and cooperation in patients having dominant-side or nondominant-side phacoemulsification. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery. 2014;40(2):199–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Choi S, Park SG, Bellan L, Lee HH, Chung SK. Crossover clinical trial of pain relief in cataract surgery. International Ophthalmology. 2018;38(3):1027–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Zhang R, Gong CB, Yu WC, Wang Z, Yao CL. The clinical application of surgical scene preconditioning for patients with phobia undergoing ocular surgery. J Otolaryngol Ophthalmol Shandong Univ. 2019;33(5):125–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Pang XY, Wang X. Perioperative influence of psychological interfering on heart rate variability and pain. Proceed Clin Med. 2007;16(2):20–2.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. West China School of Public Health and West China Fourth Hospital,Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

    Yu Xiao & Yali Liu

Authors
  1. Yu Xiao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yali Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

YX designed the study, performed the examinations, collected and analyzed the data, and wrote and revised the manuscript. YL L designed the study,conducted the surgeries,revised the manuscript and instructed the whole study and gave supervision.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yali Liu.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study has been approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of West China Fourth Hospital of Sichuan University (Registration number: HXSY-EC-2023040). All patients and their families have agreed to participate and have signed the written informed consent.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xiao, Y., Liu, Y. Comparison of pain between bilateral ICL surgeries in patients with myopia. BMC Ophthalmol 24, 175 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-024-03450-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-024-03450-5

Keywords

BMC Ophthalmology

ISSN: 1471-2415

Contact us