Ajay Kolli1, Carol B Toris2,3, David M Reed3, Jesse Gilbert3, Arthur J Sit4, Vikas Gulati2, Arash Kazemi4, Shan Fan2, David C Musch1,5, Sayoko E Moroi1,3. 1. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Kellogg Eye Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 2. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA. 3. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA. 4. Department of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. 5. Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Abstract
Purpose: To characterize the effects of timolol and latanoprost on calculated ocular perfusion pressure (OPP) in a multicenter, prospective, crossover-design study. Methods: Nonglaucomatous volunteers were evaluated at baseline, after 1 week of timolol 0.5% dosed twice daily, and after 1 week of latanoprost 0.005% dosed nightly (randomized treatment order; 6-week washout period). Pneumatonometric intraocular pressure (IOP) and brachial blood pressure (BP) were evaluated at each visit. Using 3 commonly used equations, OPP was calculated based on IOP and BP. The OPPs at each visit were compared by using linear mixed-effects models. Results: This analysis includes 121 participants (242 eyes; 75% female, 87% White, mean age 55 years). Mean OPP (standard deviation) calculated with mean arterial pressure was 46.8 (8.1) mmHg at baseline, 48.5 (7.9) mmHg with timolol (P = 0.005), and 49.6 mmHg (8.2) with latanoprost (P < 0.001). When compared with baseline, OPP calculated with diastolic BP was significantly increased with both timolol (1.3 mmHg) and latanoprost (3.1 mmHg). The OPP calculated with systolic BP was increased with latanoprost (2.8 mmHg) but decreased with timolol (-1.3 mmHg). Timolol reduced systolic BP by 3.2 mmHg. Compared with timolol, latanoprost conferred greater increases in OPP calculated with both systolic and diastolic BP compared with baseline; however, the difference in treatment effects on OPP calculated with mean arterial pressure was not significantly different (P = 0.068). Conclusion: In this crossover study of nonglaucomatous volunteers, latanoprost increased OPP. However, timolol's benefit to OPP may be limited in part because it reduced systolic BP. Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT01677507.
Purpose: To characterize the effects of timolol and latanoprost on calculated ocular perfusion pressure (OPP) in a multicenter, prospective, crossover-design study. Methods: Nonglaucomatous volunteers were evaluated at baseline, after 1 week of timolol 0.5% dosed twice daily, and after 1 week of latanoprost 0.005% dosed nightly (randomized treatment order; 6-week washout period). Pneumatonometric intraocular pressure (IOP) and brachial blood pressure (BP) were evaluated at each visit. Using 3 commonly used equations, OPP was calculated based on IOP and BP. The OPPs at each visit were compared by using linear mixed-effects models. Results: This analysis includes 121 participants (242 eyes; 75% female, 87% White, mean age 55 years). Mean OPP (standard deviation) calculated with mean arterial pressure was 46.8 (8.1) mmHg at baseline, 48.5 (7.9) mmHg with timolol (P = 0.005), and 49.6 mmHg (8.2) with latanoprost (P < 0.001). When compared with baseline, OPP calculated with diastolic BP was significantly increased with both timolol (1.3 mmHg) and latanoprost (3.1 mmHg). The OPP calculated with systolic BP was increased with latanoprost (2.8 mmHg) but decreased with timolol (-1.3 mmHg). Timolol reduced systolic BP by 3.2 mmHg. Compared with timolol, latanoprost conferred greater increases in OPP calculated with both systolic and diastolic BP compared with baseline; however, the difference in treatment effects on OPP calculated with mean arterial pressure was not significantly different (P = 0.068). Conclusion: In this crossover study of nonglaucomatous volunteers, latanoprost increased OPP. However, timolol's benefit to OPP may be limited in part because it reduced systolic BP. Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT01677507.
Authors: Catherine Jui-Ling Liu; Yu-Chieh Ko; Ching-Yu Cheng; Allen W Chiu; Joe C Chou; Wen-Ming Hsu; Jorn-Hon Liu Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: John H K Liu; John R Slight; Jason L Vittitow; Baldo Scassellati Sforzolini; Robert N Weinreb Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2016-07-22 Impact factor: 5.258