Epinastine 0.05% Ophthalmic Solution in Contact Lens-Wearing Subjects With a History of Allergic Conjunctivitis

2009 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly K. Nichols ◽  
Scot Morris ◽  
Ian B. Gaddie ◽  
David Evans
Keyword(s):  
Contact Lens ◽  
Allergic Conjunctivitis ◽  
Ophthalmic Solution ◽  
History Of

Dematiaceous fungal invasion of a bandage contact lens

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. e240029
Author(s):  
Anirban Dutta ◽  
Sujata Das ◽  
Himanshu Sekhara Behera ◽  
Ruchi Mittal
Keyword(s):  
Contact Lens ◽  
Periodic Acid ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Dematiaceous Fungi ◽  
Periodic Acid Schiff ◽  
Bandage Contact Lens ◽  
History Of ◽  
Eye Examination ◽  
The Right

A 61-year-old man presented with a 1-month history of reduced vision, redness and pain in the right eye. Examination revealed a bandage contact lens (BCL) in situ with diffuse, pigmented deposits. On removal, the underlying cornea was found to be clear. He had been prescribed the BCL 6 months ago following a deep-seated corneal foreign body removal and was unable to follow-up subsequently.The BCL was sent for microbiological and histopathological evaluation. The culture revealed growth of Cladosporium spp, a dematiaceous fungi. Periodic acid–Schiff staining revealed infiltration of pigmented fungal filaments into the substance of the BCL.While contact lens deposits are a frequent finding, fungal deposits are seldom noted. Irregular follow-up and improper lens maintenance are significant risk factors for the same. Early identification and subsequent removal of the lens is vital to prevent infection of the underlying ocular structures.

Efficacy of olopatadine ophthalmic solution 0.2% in reducing signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis

2007 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 427-433 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark B. Abelson ◽  
Paul J. Gomes ◽  
Terri Pasquine ◽  
Michael R. Edwards ◽  
Robert D. Gross ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Allergic Conjunctivitis ◽  
Ophthalmic Solution ◽  
Signs And Symptoms

scholarly journals Effect of Desonide 0.25% Ophthalmic Solution on Central Corneal Thickness and Intraocular Pressure of Patients with Allergic Conjunctivitis

1970 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 156-158
Author(s):  
Ozlem Gurses Sahin
Keyword(s):  
Intraocular Pressure ◽  
Allergic Conjunctivitis ◽  
Central Corneal Thickness ◽  
Corneal Thickness ◽  
Ophthalmic Solution ◽  
Applanation Tonometry ◽  
Goldmann Applanation Tonometry ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
Conjunctival Hyperaemia ◽  
Significant Difference

Aim: To evaluate whether a significant difference exists between the initial and final mean central corneal thickness that might affect Goldmann applanation tonometer recordings of patients with allergic conjunctivitis treated with desonide 0.25% ophthalmic solution, and to determine the effect of desonide on intraocular pressure by using adjusted intraocular pressure values.Methods: This double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial enrolled 30 patients (60 eyes) with allergic conjunctivitis. Patients were randomly assigned to receive desonide to 1 eye (study eye) and preservative-free tear supplement (Tears Naturale Free®) to the other eye (control eye) 3 times daily for 3 weeks. Goldmann applanation tonometry and central corneal thickness of both eyes were recorded on the day of presentation and 3 weeks later.Results: Regression of itching, tearing, conjunctival hyperaemia, and tarsal conjunctival papillary reaction were noted in the study eyes after 3 weeks of treatment. The control eyes showed mild regression of pruritis, tearing, conjunctival hyperaemia, and tarsal conjunctival papillary reaction after 3 weeks. There was a significant difference between the initial and final mean central corneal thickness values for the study eyes (p = 0.003). There were no statistically significant differences between the initial and final mean values of Goldmann applanation tonometry and adjusted intraocular pressure for the study eyes. No statistically significant differences were found between the initial and final mean values of any of the parameters for the control eyes.Conclusion: Inflammation-induced increase in central corneal thickness of patients with allergic conjunctivitis treated with desonide showed statistically significant regression. However, this regression did not significantly affect Goldmann applanation tonometry and adjusted intraocular pressure values of the treated eyes.

Comparison of Topical 0.05% Levocabastine and 0.1% Lodoxamide in Patients with Allergic Conjunctivitis

1998 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 207-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Richard ◽  
C. Trinquand ◽  
E. Bloch-Michel ◽  
F. Favennec ◽  
L. Helleboid ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Allergic Conjunctivitis ◽  
Ophthalmic Solution ◽  
Signs And Symptoms ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Self Evaluation ◽  
Eyelid Edema ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Allergy Symptom

Purpose The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy and safety of 0.05% levocabastine eyedrops (H1 receptor blocker given BID + vehicle BID) compared with 0.1% lodoxamide ophthalmic solution (mast-cell stabilizer instilled QID) in reducing ocular signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis. Methods A randomized, double-masked, parallel-group study was conducted in seven centres in France, in which 93 patients suffering from seasonal or perennial allergic conjunctivitis were randomly allocated to either 0.05% levocabastine (n = 47) or 0.1% lodoxamide (n = 46) in both eyes for a 14-day period. Efficacy was evaluated by subjective (prickling, burning, photophobia, itching) and objective (redness, chemosis, eyelid edema, tearing) sign scores at visits on days 7 and 14, and from data noted daily by the patient in a self-evaluation form. Safety was assessed as tolerance upon instillation and adverse event reports. Results The ocular allergy symptom and sign scores were comparable in the two treatment groups at baseline. With time, statistically and clinically significant reductions (p < 0.001) from baseline were observed for the subjective and objective scores, with no difference between the treatment groups. After the first instillation, signs were alleviated more rapidly in levocabastine-treated patients than in the lodoxamide group (p < 0.001). Overall assessments by the patient and investigator were similar in both groups. No serious adverse events were reported. Conclusions Levocabastine ophthalmic suspension 0.05% (BID) appears to be as effective and safe as lodoxamide 0.1% (QID) in the management of allergic conjunctivitis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document