TY - JOUR
T1 - Cooling Anesthesia for Intravitreal Injection
T2 - Results of the Prospective Open-Label, Dose-Ranging COOL-1 Trial
AU - Chao, Daniel L.
AU - Rinella, Nicolas T.
AU - Khanani, Arshad M.
AU - Wykoff, Charles C.
AU - Kim, Gun Ho
N1 - Funding Information:
This study is funded by the study sponsor, RecensMedical Inc. D.L.C is also supported by K08 K08EY030510.
Funding Information:
A.M.K and C.C.W are consultants to RecensMedical, Inc. D.L. C. was a consultant for RecensMedical, Inc. during the conduct of the study and is now affiliated with Janssen Research and Development, Raritan, NJ, USA. D.L.C also reports personal fees from DTx Pharma, Visgenx; grants from Ionis, Apellis, National Institutes of Health, Chengdu Pharmaceuticals, and Genentech, outside the submitted work. G.H.K. is an employee of RecensMedical, owns equity in RecensMedical, and has a patent 15/828,449 issued to RecensMedical. N.T.R reports personal fees from RecensMedical, outside the submitted work. C.C.W reports personal fees and/or grants from Adverum, Aerie Pharmaceuticals, Aldeyra, Alimera Sciences, Allergan, Allgenesis, Amgen, Annexon, Apellis, Arrowhead, Asclepix, Bausch + Lomb, Bayer, Bionic Vision Technologies, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chengdu Kanghong Biotechnology, Clearside Biomedical, EyePoint Pharmaceuticals, Gemini, Genentech, Graybug, Gyroscope, IONIS Pharmaceutical, iRENIX, IVERIC Bio, Janssen, Kato, Kodiak Sciences, Long Bridge Medical, Lowy Medical Research Institute, Nanoscope, Neurotech, NGM Biopharmaceuticals, Novartis, OccuRx, Ocular Therapeutix, ONL Therapeutics, Opthea, Oxurion, Palatin, Polyphotonix, RecensMedical, Regeneron, RegenXBio, Roche, SamChunDang Pharm, Surrozen, Taiwan Liposome Company, Takeda, Verana Health, Visgenx, Vitranu, Xbrane BioPharma, Aerpio, and Samsung Bioepis, outside the submitted work. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Chao et al.
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - Purpose: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a novel medical device to provide cooling anesthesia to the eye as local anesthesia for intravitreal injections. Study Design: First in human, open-label study of 43 subjects assessed at three different doses: −10°C for 20 seconds (group 1), −15°C for 15 seconds (group 2), and −15°C for 20 seconds (group 3). Main outcome measures were safety and pain of injection using a numeric rating scale (NRS). Results: Cooling anesthesia did not result in any serious ocular adverse events. One grade 1 adverse event was a vasovagal response during cooling administration which resolved immediately after cooling. Mean NRS scores at the time of injection for each group ranged from 2.5 to 4.3 There was a statistically significant difference between pain scores of the 3 groups at injection in aggregate but not in pairwise comparisons (P value = 0.047). There was a statistically significant decrease in pain from injection to 5 minutes post injection in all groups (P value = 0.00008, 0.003, 0.0005 for groups 1, 2, 3, respectively) as well as from 5 minutes to 24–48 hours (P value = 0.00001, 0.018, and 0.0545 for groups 1, 2, 3, respectively). Conclusion: The rapid cooling anesthesia device was well tolerated for achieving local anesthesia among patients receiving intravitreal injections with no serious ocular adverse events.
AB - Purpose: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a novel medical device to provide cooling anesthesia to the eye as local anesthesia for intravitreal injections. Study Design: First in human, open-label study of 43 subjects assessed at three different doses: −10°C for 20 seconds (group 1), −15°C for 15 seconds (group 2), and −15°C for 20 seconds (group 3). Main outcome measures were safety and pain of injection using a numeric rating scale (NRS). Results: Cooling anesthesia did not result in any serious ocular adverse events. One grade 1 adverse event was a vasovagal response during cooling administration which resolved immediately after cooling. Mean NRS scores at the time of injection for each group ranged from 2.5 to 4.3 There was a statistically significant difference between pain scores of the 3 groups at injection in aggregate but not in pairwise comparisons (P value = 0.047). There was a statistically significant decrease in pain from injection to 5 minutes post injection in all groups (P value = 0.00008, 0.003, 0.0005 for groups 1, 2, 3, respectively) as well as from 5 minutes to 24–48 hours (P value = 0.00001, 0.018, and 0.0545 for groups 1, 2, 3, respectively). Conclusion: The rapid cooling anesthesia device was well tolerated for achieving local anesthesia among patients receiving intravitreal injections with no serious ocular adverse events.
KW - Anesthesia
KW - Cooling
KW - Intravitreal injection
KW - Pain
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85123556136&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85123556136&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2147/OPTH.S336653
DO - 10.2147/OPTH.S336653
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85123556136
SN - 1177-5467
VL - 15
SP - 4659
EP - 4666
JO - Clinical Ophthalmology
JF - Clinical Ophthalmology
ER -