Assessment of non-invasive tear break-up time and tear meniscus height after instillation of three different formulations of anesthetic eye drops by Oculus Keratograph 5M / Avaliação do tempo de ruptura lacrimal não invasivo e da altura do menisco lacrimal após a instilação de três diferentes formulações de colírio anestésico por Oculus Keratograph 5M

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.

Resumo Objetivo: Avaliar o tempo de ruptura lacrimal não invasivo (NITBUT) e a altura do menisco lacrimal (TMH) após instilar os três tipos diferentes de colírio anestésico pelo Oculus Keratograph 5M. Métodos: Neste estudo prospectivo, 85 indivíduos saudáveis (85 olhos) foram divididos aleatoriamente em três grupos. Os grupos receberam aleatoriamente cloridrato de lidocaína a 2%, cloridrato de proparacaína a 0.5% e cloridrato de tetracaína a 0.5%. Os parâmetros qualitativos e quantitativos do filme lacrimal foram avaliados utilizando NITBUT e TMH, respectivamente. Em todos os grupos, a quantidade de filme lacrimal utilizando TMH foi medida no olho direito dos sujeitos, enquanto a qualidade do filme lacrimal usando NITBUT foi avaliada no olho esquerdo. A análise de variância (ANOVA) foi utilizada para comparar a diferença entre antes e depois da intervenção. Um valor de P < 0.05 foi considerado significativo. Resultados: Diferenças para TMH e NITBUT entre antes e depois da aplicação de cloridrato de lidocaína a 2% não foram estatisticamente significantes (P > 0.05). Os valores médios de NITBUT e TMH após a instilação de cloridrato de proparacaína a 0.5% mostraram uma diminuição significativa do que antes da intervenção (P < 0.05). Além disso, após o uso de cloridrato de tetracaína a 0.5%, o valor médio de NITBUT foi significativamente aumentado (P < 0.05), mas o valor médio de TMH foi significativamente menor do que antes da intervenção (P < 0.05). Conclusão: Nosso estudo mostrou que o cloridrato de lidocaína a 2% como colírio anestésico pode ser uma escolha apropriada para exames oftalmológicos devido à falta de efeito significativo sobre a quantidade e a qualidade do filme lacrimal.

Comparison of the clinical efficacy of preserved and preservative-free hydroxypropyl methylcellulose-dextran-containing eyedrops / Comparación de la eficacia clínica de los colirios con conservantes y los colirios con contenido de hidroxipropil metilcelulosa-dextran sin conservantes

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, 1mg/ml and hypromellose, 3mg/ml hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC) and group B (n=47; with multidose of artificial tear, containing 0.3g HPMC and 0.1g 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<0.001). But, the differences for the Schirmer test score and TBUT score was not significant (p=0.115, p=0.013, respectively). Conclusion: Our outcomes indicated that improvement occurred with use of both products but there was no statistically significant difference between them (AU)

Objetivo: El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar la eficacia de dos fórmulas de lágrimas artificiales de liberación sostenida. Pacientes y Métodos: Ensayo clínico aleatorizado y enmascarado para el paciente, se incluyó a un total de 88 pacientes distribuidos en dos grupos: el grupo A (n=41; con una dosis única de lágrima artificial con contenido de Dextran 70,1mg/ml e hipromelosa, 3mg/ml hidroxipropil metilcelulosa (HPMC), y el grupo B (n=47; con multidosis de lágrima artificial, con contenido de 0,3g HPMC y 0,1g de Dextran 70, y 0,01% de cloruro de benzalconio (BAK) como conservante). Se realizaron las siguientes pruebas: cuestionario del índice de enfermedad de la superficie ocular (OSDI), tear break-up time (TBUT), tinción corneal y conjuntival y prueba de Schirmer. Para el análisis estadístico se utilizó ANOVA para mediciones repetidas, a fin de evaluar las diferencias entre los dos productos. Se consideró significativo un valor p inferior a 0,05. Resultados: La media de edad de los participantes de los grupos A y B fue de 44,08±6,29 (rango de 33 a 58 años) y 45,83 ± 8,42 (de 31 a 60 años), respectivamente. Al comparar los dos grupos antes de la intervención, las puntuaciones OSDI, TBUT, las de tinción conjuntival y corneal, y las de la prueba de Schirmer no reflejaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas (p=0,339, p=0,640, p=0,334, p=0,807 y p=0,676, respectivamente). Transcurridas cuatro semanas, las puntuaciones OSDI y las de tinción conjuntival y corneal reflejaron una mejora en comparación a las puntuaciones anteriores a la intervención (p<0,001). Pero las diferencias en cuanto a las puntuaciones de la prueba de Schirmer y TBUT no fueron significativas (p=0,115, p=0,013, respectivamente). Conclusión: Nuestros resultados indican que se produjo una mejora con el uso de ambos productos, pero que no se produjo una diferencia estadísticamente significativa entre ambos (AU)

Comparison of the clinical efficacy of preserved and preservative-free hydroxypropyl methylcellulose-dextran-containing eyedrops.

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, 1mg/ml and hypromellose, 3mg/ml hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC) and group B (n=47; with multidose of artificial tear, containing 0.3g HPMC and 0.1g 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<0.001). But, the differences for the Schirmer test score and TBUT score was not significant (p=0.115, p=0.013, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our outcomes indicated that improvement occurred with use of both products but there was no statistically significant difference between them.

Comparison of non-invasive tear break-up time and tear meniscus height in healthy eyes and keratoconus using Oculus Keratograph 5M / 国际眼科杂志(Guoji Yanke Zazhi)

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.