Aim The purpose of this study is to evaluate and compare the efficacy of 4 prostaglandin analogues (PGAs) and to determine the incidence of ocular surface disease in newly diagnosed, primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) patients started on one of those 4 PGAs: bimatoprost (benzalkonium chloride, BAK, 0.3 mg/mL), latanoprost (BAK 0.2 mg/mL), travoprost (polyquad), and tafluprost (BAK-free). Patients and Methods In this single-center, open-label trial, 32 patients newly diagnosed with POAG were randomly started on one of the four PGAs. All patients underwent a complete ophthalmological exam at presentation and at 1, 3, and 6 months of follow-up. Dry eye disease (DED) was assessed using the original Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire, in order to evaluate the impact of the drops on the quality of life of patients. Results The mean age was 60.06 years ± 11.76. All four drugs equally and significantly reduced the intraocular pressure (IOP) with respect to the baseline IOP. There was a trend for a slightly greater reduction of IOP with bimatoprost, but the difference was not found to be statistically significant when compared to other PGAs. OSDI scores were significantly superior for travoprost (10.68 ± 5.73) compared to the other three drugs (p < 0.05). Latanoprost caused the most significant eyelash growth and iris discoloration. Conjunctival hyperemia and superficial keratitis occurrence were similar in the four groups. Conclusion All prostaglandin analogues equally and significantly reduce the IOP in patients with POAG. According to the results of the OSDI score, latanoprost seems to be the least tolerated among the four drugs.
Preoperative IVB before AGV was not associated with a better surgical success, IOP control, or BCVA. Its administration significantly decreased postoperative hyphema and number of last visit's antiglaucoma medications.
Purpose. To report predictive factors of outcome of conventional epithelium-off corneal crosslinking (CXL) in the treatment of progressive keratoconus. Methods. This is a monocentric observational retrospective study conducted at Eye and Ear International Hospital, Lebanon. All patients with progressive keratoconus who underwent CXL between January 2008 and January 2016, with minimal 3-years follow-up were included. Primary treatment outcomes were maximum keratometry (K max), best-corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and failure. Failure was defined as an increase of 1.00 diopters (D) or more in K max and/or an increase of 0.1 logMAR or more in CDVA and conversion to corneal transplantation. Statistical analysis was done to identify predictors of treatment success. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the correlations between baseline parameters and outcomes, and an equation for predicting K max and CDVA was created. Results. 156 eyes of 102 patients were enrolled. The mean age was 23.85 ± 6.52 years. Failure occurred in 31 eyes (19.87%). Gender and thinnest pachymetry did not have any impact on postoperative outcomes. Concerning the CDVA outcome, multivariate analysis showed that a better preoperative CDVA was associated with higher improvement in CDVA, and higher baseline K max and higher posterior mean K were associated with a worse outcome CDVA. Regarding postoperative K max, a higher baseline K max, a worse baseline CDVA, and a younger age were associated with less flattening postoperatively. Conclusion. CXL is a safe and effective method in treating progressive keratoconus. However, the clinical benefits can differ among patients, and in our series, a nonnegligible number of cases show a continued progression of their ectasia. Further studies to identify predictors of postoperative progression prior to the procedure could help sort out good responders to treatment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.