Literature DB >> 12566870

Comparison of efficacy and tolerability between two gel-forming timolol maleate ophthalmic solutions in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension.

Takashi Shibuya1, Kenji Kashiwagi, Shigeo Tsukahara.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare two gel-forming timolol maleate ophthalmic solutions, Timoptol XE and Lizmon TG, in regard to efficacy and tolerability in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension by means of a patient-masked prospective randomized crossover study. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A total of 37 patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension under treatment with antiglaucoma ophthalmic solutions including 0.5% twice-daily timolol maleate participated in this study. Only timolol maleate was withdrawn and either Timoptol XE or Lizmon TG was randomly allocated. After instillation for 1 month, the other ophthalmic solution was subsequently instilled for another month. Routine ophthalmic examination including slit-lamp examination and intraocular pressure (IOP) monitoring was conducted before instillation of gel-forming ophthalmic solutions and just after completing the instillation of each ophthalmic solution. Patient questionnaire surveys were also performed just after completing the instillation of each ophthalmic solution.
RESULTS: Mean IOP, just before the withdrawal of timolol ophthalmic solution, was 16.4 +/- 2.9 mm Hg. At the end of Timoptol XE or Lizmon TG instillation, mean IOPs were 16.3 +/- 2.5 or 16.3 +/- 3.0 mm Hg, respectively. The results of the questionnaire survey showed no significant difference between Timoptol XE and Lizmon TG in regard to all survey items. Twenty-nine patients (78.4%) preferred to use gel-forming timolol solutions rather than twice-daily timolol ophthalmic solution. The presence of concurrently used ophthalmic solutions did not effect the incidences of subjective symptoms. The incidences of objective adverse effects were not significantly different between two gel-forming timolol ophthalmic solutions.
CONCLUSION: Both gel-forming timolol ophthalmic solutions could be good choices for glaucoma treatment. Copyright 2003 S. Karger AG, Basel

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12566870     DOI: 10.1159/000068248

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmologica        ISSN: 0030-3755            Impact factor:   3.250


  5 in total

1.  Time course of changes in ocular wavefront aberration after administration of eye ointment.

Authors:  T Hiraoka; T Yamamoto; F Okamoto; T Oshika
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2012-07-20       Impact factor: 3.775

2.  The outcome of mitomycin C trabeculectomy and laser suture lysis depends on postoperative management.

Authors:  Takeo Fukuchi; Jun Ueda; Kiyoshi Yaoeda; Kieko Suda; Masaaki Seki; Haruki Abe
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.447

Review 3.  Choosing appropriate patient-reported outcomes instrument for glaucoma research: a systematic review of vision instruments.

Authors:  Jemaima Che Hamzah; Jennifer M Burr; Craig R Ramsay; Augusto Azuara-Blanco; Maria Prior
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-01-04       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Pre-validation methods for developing a patient reported outcome instrument.

Authors:  Maria E Prior; Jemaima Che Hamzah; Jillian J Francis; Craig R Ramsay; Mayret M Castillo; Susan E Campbell; Augusto Azuara-Blanco; Jennifer M Burr
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2011-08-09       Impact factor: 4.615

5.  Medical management of primary open-angle glaucoma: Best practices associated with enhanced patient compliance and persistency.

Authors:  Sadhana V Kulkarni; Karim F Damji; Yvonne M Buys
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2008-02-02       Impact factor: 2.711

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.