![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Purpose: To compare latanoprost/timolol (LT) versus travoprost/timolol (TT) fixed combinations for ocular hypertension (OHT) associated with uveitis.
Methods: Thirty-six patients (55 eyes) who were treated with LT (28 eyes) or TT (27 eyes) for OHT associated with uveitis were reviewed retrospectively. Intraocular pressure (IOP) and inflammation scores at the initiation of treatment and at the last visit during therapy were analyzed.
Results: Although IOP was reduced significantly in both LT and TT groups, the reduction rate was significantly greater with TT group than with LT. The differences in the reduction of IOP between the groups remained significant when the cases were classified into inflammation-induced OHT and steroid-induced OHT. Inflammation score was not exacerbated by LT or TT treatment.
Conclusions: Both LT and TT are safe and effective for the treatment of OHT associated with uveitis and greater IOP reduction may be achieved by TT than by LT treatment.
DECLARATION OF INTEREST
The authors report no conflicts of interest. This work was supported in part by Grant-in-Aid 24592689 for Scientific Research from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Masaru Takeuchi
MT designed the study, TK, IM, and YS collected data, MT managed data, MS analyzed and interpreted data, TK drafted the manuscript, MS, MT, IM, YS, and MT reviewed the manuscript, TK, MS, MT, IM, YS, and MT approved the manuscript.
Takayuki Kanda
MT designed the study, TK, IM, and YS collected data, MT managed data, MS analyzed and interpreted data, TK drafted the manuscript, MS, MT, IM, YS, and MT reviewed the manuscript, TK, MS, MT, IM, YS, and MT approved the manuscript.
Manzo Taguchi
MT designed the study, TK, IM, and YS collected data, MT managed data, MS analyzed and interpreted data, TK drafted the manuscript, MS, MT, IM, YS, and MT reviewed the manuscript, TK, MS, MT, IM, YS, and MT approved the manuscript.
Masaki Shibata
MT designed the study, TK, IM, and YS collected data, MT managed data, MS analyzed and interpreted data, TK drafted the manuscript, MS, MT, IM, YS, and MT reviewed the manuscript, TK, MS, MT, IM, YS, and MT approved the manuscript.
Izumi Mine
MT designed the study, TK, IM, and YS collected data, MT managed data, MS analyzed and interpreted data, TK drafted the manuscript, MS, MT, IM, YS, and MT reviewed the manuscript, TK, MS, MT, IM, YS, and MT approved the manuscript.
Yutaka Sakurai
MT designed the study, TK, IM, and YS collected data, MT managed data, MS analyzed and interpreted data, TK drafted the manuscript, MS, MT, IM, YS, and MT reviewed the manuscript, TK, MS, MT, IM, YS, and MT approved the manuscript.