Efficacy of topical carboxymethyl cellulose 0.5% and cyclosporine A 0.05% in dry eye syndrome

Figures & data

Table 1. Grading of fluorescein staining (Agrawal et al., 2006)

Grading of stain density	Score for total area
Absent	0–3
Mild	4–7
Moderate	8–12
Severe	13–18

Note: Total score of more than 3 of 18 was considered abnormal.

Table 2. Cytological grading carried out according to criteria laid down by modified Saini et al. (1990)

Grade	Goblet cells/2 HPF	Goblet cell shape
1	15	Small round epithelium with nucleocytoplasmic ratio of 1:2
2	7–14	Larger polygonal epithelial cells and nucleocytoplasmic ratio of 1:3
3	2–6	Decreased nucleocytoplasmic ratio
4	<2	Large epithelial cells with pyknotic nuclei visible

Table 3. Initial characteristics of each group with dry eye syndrome before ocular lubricants and topical cyclosporine A 0.05% were administered

Parameters	Group A (CMC 0.5%)	Group B (CsA 0.05%)
Total subjects (eyes)	45	45
Age (years)	35.87 ± 7.95	37.51 ± 6.78
Gender (M:F)	22:23	23:22
VAS	4.96 ± 2.50	3.96 ± 2.65
SCH (mm)	6.29 ± 3.07	5.49 ± 2.80
TUBT (s)	3.53 ± 2.01	3.11 ± 1.88
FLU	8.60 ± 3.94	12.87 ± 4.29
GCD (cell/100 epithelial cells)	3.20 ± 2.78	3.16 ± 2.61

Table 4. Comparison of different parameters in group A before and after 6 weeks of treatment with carboxymethylcellulose 0.5%

Parameters	Baseline (mean ± SD)	Follow up (mean ± SD)	p-values
VAS	4.96 ± 2.50	7.27 ± 2.22	<0.001
SCH	6.29 ± 3.07	10.11 ± 5.24	<0.001
TUBT	3.53 ± 2.08	4.24 ± 2.08	<0.001
FLU	8.60 ± 3.94	6.93 ± 4.79	<0.011
GCD	3.20 ± 2.78	3.73 ± 2.98	<0.004

Notes: Significant improvement was seen in the baseline parameters after 6 weeks of treatment. VAS—visual analogue scale, SCH—Schirmer’s test, TBUT—tear breakup time, FLU—fluorescein stain, GCD—goblet cell density.

Table 5. Comparison of different parameters in group B before and after 6 weeks of treatment with cyclosporine A 0.05%

Characteristics	Baseline	Follow up	p-values
VAS	3.96 ± 2.65	7.78 ± 1.66	<0.001
SCH	5.49 ± 2.80	11.80 ± 5.67	<0.001
TUBT	3.11 ± 1.88	5.22 ± 2.38	<0.001
FLU	12.00 ± 4.29	6.16 ± 2.54	<0.001
GCD	3.16 ± 2.61	4.91 ± 3.26	<0.001

Notes: This table shows significant improvement with the use of cyclosporine A 0.05% after 6 weeks of treatment. VAS—visual analogue scale, SCH—Schirmer’s test, TBUT—tear breakup time, FLU—fluorescein stain, GCD—goblet cell density.

Table 6. Comparison of different parameters in group A and group B after 6 weeks of treatment

Parameters	Group A (mean value ± SD)	Group B (mean value ± SD)	p-value	Remarks
VAS	7.27 ± 2.22	7.78 ± 1.66	=0.053	Not significant
SCH	10.11 ± 5.24	11.80 ± 5.67	=0.445	Not significant
TUBT	4.24 ± 2.08	5.22 ± 2.38	=0.267	Not significant
FLU	6.93 ± 4.79	6.16 ± 2.54	<0.001	Significant
GCD	3.73 ± 2.98	4.91 ± 3.26	=0.642	Not significant

Notes: This table shows significant difference of FLU between the two groups after 6 weeks of treatment. VAS—visual analogue scale, SCH—Schirmer’s test, TBUT—tear breakup time, FLU—fluorescein stain, GCD-goblet cell density.

Agrawal, V., Sangwan, V., & Fernandez, M. (2006). Clinical handbook of dry eye. India: Ophthalmic Communications.

 Google Scholar

Saini, J. S., Rajwanshi, A., & Dhar, S. (1990). Clinicopathological correlation of hard contact lens related changes in tarsal conjunctiva by impression cytology. Acta Ophthalmologica, 68, 65–70.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar