Effects of contact and non-contact laser photocoagulation therapy on ocular surface in patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy

Loo Wan-Wei, Zakariah Sakinah, Embong Zunaina


The aim of the study is to evaluate the effects of contact and non-contact laser photocoagulation (LP) on ocular surface changes and Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) score in patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). This was a single center, prospective, randomised, parallel-controlled trial of pilot study in Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia between June 2013 and May 2014. Eye with PDR was selected and randomised into 2 groups (Contact LP group and Non-contact LP group) by using random sampling envelope method. Contact LP group was treated with contact LP via slit lamp laser delivery system. Non-contact LP group was treated with non-contact LP via binocular laser indirect ophthalmoscopy system. Main outcome measures were Schirmer test value, tear film break-up time (TBUT) and OSDI score at baseline and at 3 months post laser therapy. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 22.0. A total of 60 eyes were recruited (30 eyes in Contact LP and 30 eyes in Non-contact LP). Contact LP showed significant reduction of TBUT (p = 0.038) and significant increase in mean OSDI score (p = 0.001) at 3 months post laser therapy. However, there was no significant difference of mean change of Schirmer test value and TBUT between the two groups except for OSDI score (p = 0.044). Both mode of laser deliveries (contact LP and non-contact LP) showed comparable effects on ocular surface disease in PDR patient that underwent laser pan retinal photocoagulation.


Laser photocoagulation, proliferative diabetic retinopathy, ocular surface disease

Full Text:



Gadkari SS, Maskati QB, Nayak BK. Prevalence of diabetic retinopathy in India: The All India Ophthalmological Society Diabetic Retinopathy Eye Screening Study 2014. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2016; 64(1):pp.38-44.

Zhang X, Zhao L, Deng S, Sun X, Wang N. Dry Eye Syndrome in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: Prevalence, Etiology, and Clinical Characteristics. J Ophthalmol. 2016; 2016:8201053.

Dry Eye Syndrome in Subjects With Diabetes and Association With Neuropathy. Achtsidis V, Eleftheriadou I, Kozanidou E, Voumvourakis KI, Stamboulis E, et al. Diabetes Care. 2014; 37(10): e210-e211.

Kesarwani D, Rizvi SWA, Khan AA, Amitava AK, Vasenwala SM, Siddiqui Z. Tear film and ocular surface dysfunction in diabetes mellitus in an Indian population. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2017; 65(4):pp.301-304.

Mizuno K. Binocular indirect argon laser photocoagulator. Br J Ophthalmol. 1981; 65(6):pp.425-428.

Tinley CG, Gray RH. Routine, single session, indirect laser for proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Eye (Lond). 2009; 23(9):pp.1819-1823. doi: 10.1038/eye.2008.394.

Puri P, Verma D, McKibbin M. Management of ocular perforations resulting from peribulbar anaesthesia. Indian J Ophthalmol. 1999; 47(3):pp.181-183.

Vakili R, Tauber S, Lim ES. Successful management of retinal tear post-laser in situ keratomileusis retreatment. Yale J Biol Med. 2002; 75(1):pp.55-57.

Ghosh YK, Banerjee S, Tyagi AK. Effectiveness of emergency argon laser retinopexy performed by trainee doctors. Eye (Lond). 2005; 19(1):pp.52-54.

Petrou P, Lett KS. Effectiveness of emergency argon laser retinopexy performed by trainee physicians: 10 years later. Ophthalmic Surg lasers Imaging Retina. 2014; 45(3):pp.194-196. doi: 10.3928/23258160-120.

Law NM, Fan RF. Clinical experince with the laser indirect ophthalmoscope. Ann Acad Med Singaapoe. 1991; 20(6):pp.750-754.

Gurelik G, Coney JM, Zakov ZN. Binocular indirect panretinal laser photocoagulation for the treatment of proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2004; 35(2):pp.94-102.

Ambresin A, Strueven V, Pourmaras JA. Painless indirect argon laser in high risk proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2015; 232(4):pp.509-513. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1545795.

Jalali S. Principles of Laser Treatment and How to get Good Outcomes in a Patient with Diabetic Retinopathy. JK Science. 2004; 6(1):pp.4-8.

Friberg TR. Clinical experience with a binocular indirect ophthalmoscope laser delivery system. Retina. 1987; 7(1):pp.28-31.

Ozdemir M, Buyukbese MA, Cetinkaya A, Ozdemir G. Risk factors for ocular surface disorders in patients with diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2003; 59(3):pp.195-199.

Pardos GJ, Krachmer JH. Photocoagulation: its effect on the corneal endothelial cell density of diabetics. Arch Ophthalmol. 1981; 99(1):pp.84-86.

Dogru M, Kaderli B, Gelisken O, Yucel A, Avci R, et al. Ocular surface changes with applanation contact lens and coupling fluid use after argon laser photocoagulation in noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004; 138(3):pp.381-388.

Nepp J, Abela C, Polzer I, Derbolav A, Wedrich A. Is there a correlation between the severity of diabetic retinopathy and keratoconjunctivitis sicca? Cornea. 2000; 19(4):pp.487-491.

Inoue K, Kato S, Ohara C, Numaga J, Amano S, et al. Ocular and systemic factors relevant to diabetic keratoepitheliopathy. Cornea. 2001; 20(8):pp.798-801.

Szalai E, Deák E, Módis L Jr, Németh G, Berta A, et al. Early corneal cellular and nerve fiber pathology in young patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus identified using corneal confocal microscopy. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2016; 57:pp.853–858.

Cousen P, Cackett P, Bennett H, Swa K, Dhillon B: Tear production and corneal sensitivity in diabetes. J Diabetes Complications. 2007; 21(6): pp.371-373.

Goebbels M. Tear secretion and tear film function in insulin dependent diabetics. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000; 84(1):pp.19-21.

Saito J, Enoki M, Hara M, Morishige N, Chikama T, et al. Correlation of corneal sensation, but not of basal or reflex tear secretion, with the stage of diabetic retinopathy. Cornea. 2003; 22(1):pp.15-18.

Li N, Deng XG, He MF. Comparison of the Schirmer I test with and without topical anesthesia for diagnosing dry eye. Int J Ophthalmol. 2012; 5(4):pp.478-481. doi: 10.3980/j.issn.2222-3959.2012.04.14.

Fermon S, Ball S, Paulin JM, Davila R, Guttman S. Schirmer I test and break-up time test standardization in Mexican population without dry eye. Rev Mex Oftalmol. 2010; 84(4):pp.228-232.

Dogru M. Author reply. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005; 139(4):pp.755-756.

Gunay M, Celik G, Yildiz E, Bardak H, Koc N, et al. Ocular surface characteristics in diabetic children. Curr Eye Res. 2016; 41:pp.1526–1531.

Ljubimov AV. Diabetic complications in the cornea. Vision Res. 2017; 139:138-152. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2017.03.002.

Figueroa-Ortiz LC, Jimenez RE, Garcia-Ben A, Garcia-Campos J. Study of tear function and the conjunctival surface in diabetic patients. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol. 2011; 86(4):pp.107-112. doi: 10.1016/j.oftal.2010.12.010.

Fuerst N, Langelier N, Massaro-Giordano M, Pistilli M, Stasi K, et al. Tear osmolairty and dry eye symptoms in diabetics. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014; 8:pp.507-515. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S51514.

Najafi L, Malek M, Valojerdi AE, Khamseh ME, Aghaei H. Dry eye disease in type 2 diabetes mellitus; comparison of the tear osmolarity test with other common diagnostic tests: a diagnostic accuracy study using STARD standard. J Diabetes Metab Disord. 2015; 14:pp.39. doi: 10.1186/s40200-015-0157-y.

Manaviat MR, Rashidi M, Afkhami-Ardekani M, Shoja MR. Prevalence of dry eye syndrome and diabetic retinopathy in type 2 diabetic patients. BMC Ophthalmol. 2008; 8:pp.10. doi: 10.1186/1471-2415-8-10

Copyright (c) 2019 Journal of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences (JBCS)

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.


Flag Counter           


                                              Copyright © 2016 AMDI Publisher, Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Disclaimer : This website has been updated to the best of our knowledge to be accurate. However, Universiti Sains Malaysia shall not be liable for any loss or damage caused by the usage of any information obtained from this web site.
                                            Best viewed: Mozilla Firefox 4.0 & Google Chrome at 1024 × 768 resolution.