4.1 Article

Evaluation of corneal staining with an antihistamine-releasing contact lens

期刊

CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPTOMETRY
卷 106, 期 4, 页码 380-385

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/08164622.2022.2048174

关键词

Contact lenses; corneal epithelium; histamine antagonists

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Two clinical trials found that an antihistamine-releasing soft contact lens worn on a daily disposable modality for 12 weeks did not significantly impact corneal epithelium integrity. Both the test and placebo lenses were well tolerated by subjects.
Background To evaluate the effect of an antihistamine-releasing soft contact lens on corneal epithelium integrity when worn on a daily disposable modality for 12 weeks. Methods Two clinical trials using the same randomised, double-masked, placebo-controlled, parallel-group design enrolled healthy contact lens wearers. Participants wore either etafilcon A with 0.019 mg ketotifen (test; n = 374) or etafilcon A with no added drug (placebo; n = 186). Assessments were conducted at baseline, 1 week and 4, 8, and 12 weeks. Slit-lamp evaluations of corneal staining (using sodium fluorescein) in all regions of the corneas of both eyes were graded on a 0-4 scale. Data from all randomised participants were analysed. Results Corneal staining was infrequent and, where present, was mild (Grade 2) or trace (Grade 1). There were no Grade 3 or 4 findings of corneal staining. The overall proportion of findings of Grade 0 corneal staining was 95.86% with the test lens and 95.88% with the placebo lens. The odds of no staining were not statistically different between the test and placebo lenses (Odds Ratio: 0.96, 95% Confidence Intervals: 0.76 to 1.20). There were no serious ocular adverse events or signs of ocular surface medicamentosa. Conclusion Both test and placebo lenses were well tolerated by subjects during the 3 months of wear. The antihistamine-releasing contact lens does not significantly impact corneal epithelial integrity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据