PURPOSE: The main purpose of this prospective study was to compare the efficacy, local tolerance, and safety of topical lomefloxacin 0.3% and topical ofloxacin 0.3% in the treatment of acute bacterial conjunctivitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty patients with acute bacterial conjunctivitis were included in a randomized, prospective, parallel-group study. Twenty patients were assigned to the lomefloxacin group (Okacin, CIBA Vision Ophthalmics) and 20 patients to ofloxacin (Oflox, Allergan). Lomefloxacin 0.3% was given 1 drop every 2 hours during waking hours on the first day then twice daily for one week. Ofloxacin 0.3% eyedrops were given four times daily. All patients underwent eye examination and clinical findings were graded and recorded according to severity of lid hyperemia, lid edema, lid crusting, conjunctival edema and discharge, bulbar conjunctival hyperemia, palpebral conjunctival hyperemia, corneal edema, and ocular discomfort. The score for each clinical sign was recorded before and after treatment. The mean cumulative sum score (CSS) was obtained by adding the scores for signs and symptoms. All conjunctival swabs were cultured and tested for sensitivity. Patients with confirmed bacterial conjunctivitis were included. RESULTS: There were 10 male and 10 female patients in each group. The age range was from 1 to 78 years, and the mean age was 35 years in the lomefloxacin group. In the ofloxacingroup the age range was from 1 to 70 years, and the mean age was 26 years. There was no significant difference between the two groups in relation to age or sex. The causative organisms were Staphylococcus epidermidis in 16 cases (36%), alpha-hemolytic Streptococci in 9 (20%), Haemophilus spp. 6 (13%), Staphylococcus aureus 5 (11%), Streptococcus pneumoniae 4 (9%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa 3 (7%), and other 2 (4%). The mean CSS for conjunctivitis was 12.1 before therapy in the lomefloxacin group and 12.7 in the ofloxacin group. On the 7th day of therapy, the mean CSS was 0.7 in the lomefloxacin group, and 1.6 for ofloxacin. All patients showed improvement, but a total of 18 out of 20 (88%) in the lomefloxacin group showed complete resolution compared to 15 (75%) in the ofloxacin group. The difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.08). Tolerance was excellent in both groups, and no side effects were reported. A burning sensation was noted by two patients, one in each group. CONCLUSIONS:Lomefloxacin and ofloxacin were equally effective and safe in the treatment of acute bacterial conjunctivitis.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The main purpose of this prospective study was to compare the efficacy, local tolerance, and safety of topical lomefloxacin 0.3% and topical ofloxacin 0.3% in the treatment of acute bacterial conjunctivitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty patients with acute bacterial conjunctivitis were included in a randomized, prospective, parallel-group study. Twenty patients were assigned to the lomefloxacin group (Okacin, CIBA Vision Ophthalmics) and 20 patients to ofloxacin (Oflox, Allergan). Lomefloxacin 0.3% was given 1 drop every 2 hours during waking hours on the first day then twice daily for one week. Ofloxacin 0.3% eyedrops were given four times daily. All patients underwent eye examination and clinical findings were graded and recorded according to severity of lid hyperemia, lid edema, lid crusting, conjunctival edema and discharge, bulbar conjunctival hyperemia, palpebral conjunctival hyperemia, corneal edema, and ocular discomfort. The score for each clinical sign was recorded before and after treatment. The mean cumulative sum score (CSS) was obtained by adding the scores for signs and symptoms. All conjunctival swabs were cultured and tested for sensitivity. Patients with confirmed bacterial conjunctivitis were included. RESULTS: There were 10 male and 10 female patients in each group. The age range was from 1 to 78 years, and the mean age was 35 years in the lomefloxacin group. In the ofloxacin group the age range was from 1 to 70 years, and the mean age was 26 years. There was no significant difference between the two groups in relation to age or sex. The causative organisms were Staphylococcus epidermidis in 16 cases (36%), alpha-hemolytic Streptococci in 9 (20%), Haemophilus spp. 6 (13%), Staphylococcus aureus 5 (11%), Streptococcus pneumoniae 4 (9%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa 3 (7%), and other 2 (4%). The mean CSS for conjunctivitis was 12.1 before therapy in the lomefloxacin group and 12.7 in the ofloxacin group. On the 7th day of therapy, the mean CSS was 0.7 in the lomefloxacin group, and 1.6 for ofloxacin. All patients showed improvement, but a total of 18 out of 20 (88%) in the lomefloxacin group showed complete resolution compared to 15 (75%) in the ofloxacin group. The difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.08). Tolerance was excellent in both groups, and no side effects were reported. A burning sensation was noted by two patients, one in each group. CONCLUSIONS:Lomefloxacin and ofloxacin were equally effective and safe in the treatment of acute bacterial conjunctivitis.