A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Nociceptive sensation and sensitivity evoked from human cornea and conjunctiva stimulated by CO2. | LitMetric

Nociceptive sensation and sensitivity evoked from human cornea and conjunctiva stimulated by CO2.

Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci

School of Optometry, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.

Published: February 2003

Purpose: To compare sensation and sensitivity evoked from human cornea and conjunctiva stimulated by CO2.

Methods: Twenty healthy participants were recruited for the study. Central corneal and temporal conjunctival chemical sensation and sensitivity of only one eye of each subject were evaluated. Air mixed with different concentrations of CO(2) was delivered by a modified Belmonte pneumatic esthesiometer. The ascending method of limits was used to determine the sensitivity and subjects were required to characterize the sensation at threshold.

Results: The sensations evoked by CO(2) in the cornea and conjunctiva were stinging or burning. The sensation evoked by mechanical stimulation was that of irritation. The corneal and conjunctival chemical thresholds were 31% +/- 2% and 54% +/- 5% CO(2) (mean +/- SE), respectively. The corneal and conjunctival mechanical thresholds were 80 +/- 6 and 140 +/- 10 mL/min (mean +/- SE), respectively. The corneal sensitivity was significantly higher for both mechanical and chemical stimuli (P < 0.05).

Conclusions: The results suggest that CO(2) stimulates similar corneal and conjunctival nociceptors in that the interpretations were the same (i.e., nociceptive). The central cornea had a higher sensitivity to CO(2) than the temporal conjunctiva, which may reflect a different peripheral innervation, such as different nerve density or different receptor characteristics. Sensations evoked by mechanical and chemical stimulation were different, which suggests that at the peripheral level, the two modalities stimulate two different kinds of molecular receptors or channels and that this information is somehow retained within the nociceptive system.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/iovs.02-0003DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

sensation sensitivity
12
cornea conjunctiva
12
corneal conjunctival
12
sensitivity evoked
8
evoked human
8
human cornea
8
conjunctiva stimulated
8
conjunctival chemical
8
sensations evoked
8
evoked mechanical
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!