Twenty-four hour control of intraocular pressure with dorzolamide and timolol maleate in exfoliation and primary open-angle glaucoma

Abstract

Results On timolol monotherapy patients with exfoliation glaucoma had a higher mean lOP

Twenty-four-hour efficacy of the brimonidine/timolol fixed combination versus therapy with the unfixed components

“…[6][7][8][9][10][11][12] All patients signed an Institutional Review Board approved informed consent form before enrollment. Previously treated patients underwent an untreated washout period comprising 4 weeks for brimonidine, or dorzolamide; 5 weeks for beta-blockers or the dorzolamide/timolol fixed combination; and 6 weeks for prostaglandin analogues.…”

Transforming and insulin-like growth factors in the aqueous humour of patients with exfoliation syndrome

“…Patients with exfoliation glaucoma demonstrate worse intraocular pressure characteristics [25,26], poorer response to medications [26,27], faster deterioration [36] and show a far greater prevalence of blindness than do patients with primary open-angle glaucoma [36,37].…”

Diurnal intraocular pressure reduction with latanoprost 0.005% compared to timolol maleate 0.5% as monotherapy in subjects with exfoliation glaucoma

“…3,11,19 Often the initial response to medications is greater with XFG, but in the long term these subjects can be more difficult to control with medical therapy than those with POAG. 14,17,24 It is uncertain whether this is due to the declining efficacy of the medications themselves, 2,16,20 the significantly higher mean IOP values, 17 the greater fluctuation of 24-h IOP, 23,24 or the rising IOP during the course of XFG. 16 In the past, XFG required surgical intervention more often and had a worse prognosis despite recourse to surgery earlier and more often.…”

“…16 It is therefore more likely for adjunctive therapy for multiple drugs and maximum medical therapy to be employed in the medical treatment of XFG. [17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24] It is well documented that XFG has a worse prognosis than POAG, [25][26][27][28][29] but it has never been elucidated to date whether this is due to the difference in age, the worse IOP characteristics of XFG, or to an often quoted 'poorer response' of XFG to medications. Although in the literature there is often a suggestion that XFG demonstrates a poorer response to medications, 17,20,28 this belief stems from retrospective data on glaucoma cohorts with different baseline IOPs and relies on evidence from a time when only timolol and pilocarpine were available as treatment options for this glaucoma.…”