Efficacy and safety of an extemporaneous preparation of 2% ganciclovir eye drops in CMV anterior uveitis

Aims. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of timolol in the treatment of myopic regression after laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).Methods. We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Chinese Biological Medicine (CBM) from the inception to July 2015 for relevant randomized controlled trials that examined timolol therapy for myopic regression. The methodological quality of the studies included was assessed using the Revman 5.3 software.Results. We included six clinical trials involving 483 eyes in this review, including 246 eyes in treated group and 237 eyes in controlled group. We observed statistically significant improvements on the postoperative SE in the 3 months. However, the change of CCT was not statistically different between the control group and the experimental group. There were fewer cases of IOP, UDVA, and CDVA in treated group having significant difference from the controlled group.Conclusions. Topical timolol could be an effective treatment for reduction of myopic regression especially the spherical errors after myopic LASIK. Further RCTs with larger sample sizes for these trials are warranted to determine the efficacy and limitation for myopic regression after LASIK.

Download Full-text

A prospective study of efficacy and safety of olopatadine versus azelastine in allergic conjunctivitis at a tertiary care hospital

International Journal of Basic & Clinical Pharmacology ◽

10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20173276 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 6 (8) ◽

pp. 1948 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Jayanthi C. R. ◽

Nanthini R. ◽

. Vijayalakshmi

Keyword(s):

Mast Cell ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Allergic Conjunctivitis ◽

Tertiary Care ◽

Signs And Symptoms ◽

Eye Drops ◽

Care Hospital ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

H1 Receptor ◽

Olopatadine Hydrochloride

Background: Allergic conjunctivitis, an ocular surface inflammatory disease with significant social and economic impact affects approximately 25% of the general population. H1 receptor blockers, mast cell stabilizers and drugs that block cytokine and prostaglandin formation form the treatment armamentarium. Olopatadine hydrochloride and Azelastine hydrochloride are dual-acting selective H1 receptor antagonist with mast-cell stabilizing property. This study was undertaken to assess the efficacy and safety of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% and Azelastine hydrochloride 0.05% in allergic conjunctivitis amongst Indians.Methods: After obtaining Institutional Ethics Committee approval and written informed consent, 120 patients diagnosed with allergic conjunctivitis fulfilling the inclusion/exclusion criteria were enrolled in the study. Study was done from April 2014 to June 2015 at Minto eye hospital. Study subjects were treated with olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% and Azelastine hydrochloride 0.05% eye drops BD for 15 days. Ocular symptoms, instead of and signs and adverse events, if any were recorded on the day 8 and day 15 follow up visits.Results: At the end of the study period, the reduction in the ocular itching score from baseline was higher in the olopatadine group compared to the azelastine group (p<0.002). Similarly, the scores of ocular congestion (p<0.008), foreign body sensation (p<0.009), tearing (p<0.001), erythema (p<0.002) and chemosis (p<0.015) also showed larger reduction in the olopatadine treated patients. The common adverse events encountered in both the groups were stinging after instillation, burning, bitter taste and headache.Conclusions: In allergic conjunctivitis, both olopatadine and azelastine were found to be effective in relieving ocular signs and symptoms, but olopatadine was found to be superior in terms of efficacy, safety and tolerability with minimal side effects.

Download Full-text

Lens and Anterior Uvea

10.4018/978-1-7998-6937-5.ch010 ◽

2022 ◽

pp. 359-392

Keyword(s):

Macular Edema ◽

Anterior Uveitis ◽

Clinical Signs ◽

Inflammatory Cells ◽

Clinical Findings ◽

Eye Drops ◽

Systemic Diseases ◽

Intravitreal Triamcinolone ◽

Keratic Precipitates ◽

Intravitreal Triamcinolone Injection

This chapter illustrates photos of clinical signs seen in uveitis and interesting cases of lens pathologies. Anterior uveitis is the inflammation of the iris and the ciliary body. Anterior uveitis can be idiopathic, isolated, or associated with systemic diseases. The clinical findings observed in anterior uveitis include keratic precipitates, inflammatory cells and flare in anterior chamber, hypopyon, rarely hyphema, miosis, iris nodules and atrophy, synechiae, and band keratopathy in chronic cases (shown in corneal degenerations chapter). The inflammation in anterior uveitis is almost always immune. Treatment includes steroid eye drops, cycloplegic drops, sub-Tenon steroid injections when cystoid macular edema is present. Chronic macular edema can be treated with intravitreal Triamcinolone injection and Dexamethasone implants. In cases of refractory anterior uveitis or associated immune systemic diseases, immunomodulatory treatment or biologic agents are prescribed.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and safety of glycyrrhizin 2.5% eye drops in the treatment of moderate dry eye disease: results from a prospective, open-label pilot study

Clinical Ophthalmology ◽

10.2147/opth.s186074 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol Volume 12 ◽

pp. 2629-2636 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Carole Burillon ◽

Frédéric Chiambaretta ◽

Pierre-Jean Pisella

Keyword(s):

Pilot Study ◽

Dry Eye ◽

Dry Eye Disease ◽

Eye Disease ◽

Eye Drops ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Open Label

Download Full-text

Meta analysis about the efficacy and safety of anti-ocular hypertension eye drops without benzalkonium chloride

Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Medicine ◽

10.1016/s1995-7645(13)60181-9 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 6 (12) ◽

pp. 1004-1008 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Yan-Qing Wang ◽

Xin Wang ◽

Ping Liu

Keyword(s):

Ocular Hypertension ◽

Benzalkonium Chloride ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Eye Drops ◽

Efficacy And Safety

Download Full-text

Posology, Efficacy, and Safety of Epidermal Growth Factor Eye Drops in 305 Patients: Logistic Regression and Group-Wise Odds of Published Data

Journal of Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics ◽

10.1089/jop.2011.0236 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 28 (5) ◽

pp. 467-472 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

José Manuel Lou-Bonafonte ◽

Elena Bonafonte-Marquez ◽

Sergio Bonafonte-Royo ◽

Pedro A. Martínez-Carpio

Keyword(s):

Logistic Regression ◽

Growth Factor ◽

Epidermal Growth Factor ◽

Published Data ◽

Eye Drops ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Epidermal Growth

Download Full-text

Prospective study comparing Xalatan® eye drops and two similar generics as to the efficacy and safety profile

European Journal of Ophthalmology ◽

10.1177/1120672117747030 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 28 (4) ◽

pp. 378-384 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Andreas Diagourtas ◽

Kostantinos Kagelaris ◽

Kostantinos Oikonomakis ◽

Andreas Droulias ◽

Nikolaos Kokolakis ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Intraocular Pressure ◽

Safety Profile ◽

Ocular Surface ◽

Disease Index ◽

Ocular Surface Disease ◽

Eye Drops ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Ocular Surface Disease Index ◽

Significant Difference ◽

The Mean

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety between two generic prostaglandins Lataz–Xalaprost (Greece) and the corresponding original drops (Xalatan®). Material and methods: In this prospective randomized study, 60 patients diagnosed with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension were enrolled, who had never received antiglaucoma treatment. Subjects were divided randomly into three groups (Xalatan, Lataz, and Xalaprost groups) and they were studied over 16 weeks. At each visit, the mean applanation tonometry values and tear break-up time were measured. The Ocular Surface Disease Index questionnaire was used to evaluate patient’s symptoms. Results: There was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) in the mean values of the intraocular pressure between the baseline and the last visit (Xalatan group: from 23.11 ± 1.61 mmHg to 15.81 ± 1.22 mmHg, Lataz group: from 23.26 ± 1.33 mmHg to 15.80 ± 1.47 mmHg, and Xalaprost group: from 23.08 ± 1.45 mmHg to 16.08 ± 1.38 mmHg). Both generic eye drops showed mean percentage intraocular pressure reduction comparable to the standards of prostaglandin analogues (Xalatan: 31.57%, Lataz: 32.06%, and Xalaprost: 30.34%). Xalatan reduced the tear break-up time less, followed by Lataz and then by Xalaprost (Xalatan: from 8.5 to 8 s, Lataz: from 8.2 to 7.4 s, and Xalaprost: from 8.7 to 7.7 s). Xalatan presented the best safety profile, followed by Lataz and least was Xalaprost, according to Ocular Surface Disease Index questionnaire’s results. Conclusion: No significant difference was recorded in the effectiveness of each generic prostaglandin compared to the original. Furthermore, no patient had to change medication. The differences that arose in the safety profile of the three eye drops suggest a prompt closer initial monitoring of patients who are administered generic eye drops.

Download Full-text