Search

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of two sustained-release formulation of artificial tear drops. Patients and methods: This is a randomized patient-masked clinical trial, a total 88 patients into two group A (n = 41; with single dose of artificial tear, containing dextran 70, 1 mg/ml and hypromellose, 3 mg/ml hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC) and group B (n = 47; with multidose of artificial tear, containing 0.3 g HPMC and 0.1 g of dextran 70, with 0.01% benzalkonium chloride (BAK) as preservative) were completed the study. The ocular surface disease index (OSDI) questionnaire, tear break up time (TBUT), corneal and conjunctival staining and Schirmer test, were performed. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to assess the differences among the two products. A p-value less than 0.05 was considered significant. Results: The mean of age of the participants in the Group A and B was 44.08 ± 6.29 (range, 33–58 years) years and 45.83 ± 8.42 (31–60 years), respectively. In comparing two groups before the intervention, the OSDI scores, the TBUT scores, the conjunctival and corneal staining scores and the Schirmer scores did not show statistically significant differences (p = 0.339, p = 0.640, p = 0.334, p = 0.807 and p = 0.676, respectively). After 4 weeks, the OSDI scores, conjunctival and corneal staining scores showed improvement in compare to those before the intervention (p

AIM: To compare the non-invasive tear break-up time(NITBUT)and tear meniscus height(TMH)measurements in keratoconus patients and normal subjects, and to determine the relationship between these measurements with keratoconus disease by the Oculus Keratograph 5M(K5M). METHODS:Fifty keratoconus patients(100 eyes)and 50 healthy subjects(100 eyes)participated in the study. The age range in keratoconus group was 15-60(mean ± standard deviation=28.33±8.60)y, and in control group was 18-60(26.25±1.11)y. The measurements of NITBUT and TMH were performed using the K5M. RESULTS: The mean value of NITBUT between the keratoconus group and the control group showed no statistically significant different(P=0.58). Also, the mean of TMH between two groups was not significantly different(P=0.69). The results of correlation coefficient between the variables of the study demonstrated that there was no significant relationship between the NITBUT and TMH measurements with the two groups(keratoconus group: r= 0.053, P=0.721; control group; r=-0.0501, P=0.7098). CONCLUSION: Our study shows that the presence of keratoconus has no clinically significant impact on the quality and quantity of tear film.

Abstract Purpose: To assess the non-invasive tear break-up time (NITBUT) and tear meniscus height (TMH) after instilling the three different types of anesthetic eye drops by Oculus Keratograph 5M. Methods: In this prospective study, 85 healthy subjects (85 eyes) were randomly divided into three groups. The groups were randomly received lidocaine hydrochloride 2%, proparacaine hydrochloride 0.5%, and tetracaine hydrochloride 0.5%. The qualitative and quantitative parameters of tear film were assessed using NITBUT and TMH, respectively. In all groups, the quantity of tear film using TMH was measured in the right eye of subjects, while the quality of tear film using NITBUT was assessed in the left eye. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the difference between before and after the intervention. A P-value < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: Differences for TMH and NITBUT between before and after applying lidocaine hydrochloride 2% were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The mean values of NITBUT and TMH after the instillation of proparacaine hydrochloride 0.5% showed a significant decrease than before the intervention (P < 0.05). Also, after the use of tetracaine hydrochloride 0.5%, the mean value of NITBUT was significantly increased (P < 0.05), but the mean value of TMH was significantly decreased than before the intervention (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Our study showed that lidocaine hydrochloride 2% as an anesthetic eye drops can be an appropriate choice for eye examinations due to a lack of significant effect on the quantity and quality of tear film.