209
Views
35
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Review

Glaucoma therapy: preservative-free for all?

Pages 707-717 | Published online: 13 Apr 2018

Figures & data

Figure 1 Tear film disruption caused by instillation of a single drop of BAK (0.01%).

Notes: Sixteen healthy volunteers, pretreated with a local anesthetic, received two drops of BAK or saline. The time until the appearance of focal or generalized drying was measured. Adapted by permission from BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. Effect of benzalkonium chloride on the stability of the precorneal tear film in rabbit and man, Wilson WS, Duncan AJ, Jay JL, British Journal of Ophthalmology. 59(11):667–669. © 1975.Citation19
Abbreviation: BAK, benzalkonium chloride.
Figure 1 Tear film disruption caused by instillation of a single drop of BAK (0.01%).

Figure 2 Ocular symptoms and signs with preservative-added and preservative-free glaucoma medications.

Notes: Exactly 9,659 patients receiving glaucoma medication were entered into a multicenter cross-sectional epidemiologic survey. Patients were questioned regarding ocular symptoms and they underwent clinical examination. The chart shows the proportion of patients displaying each symptom or clinical sign (*p<0.001). Republished with permission of Wichtig Editore srl, from Ocular symptoms and signs with preserved and preservative-free glaucoma medications, Jaenen N, Baudouin C, Pouliquen P, Manni G, Figueiredo A, Zeyen T, Volume 17, edition 3, Copyright 2007; permission conveyed through Copyright Clearance Center, Inc.Citation25
Figure 2 Ocular symptoms and signs with preservative-added and preservative-free glaucoma medications.

Figure 3 Hyperemia in patients receiving preservative-added or preservative-free glaucoma medication.

Notes: A multicenter, single-blind, parallel-group study compared the safety and efficacy of preservative-added and preservative-free latanoprost eye drops in 463 patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension. The graph shows the proportion of patients with moderate or severe conjunctival hyperemia during 84 days of treatment (**p<0.01). Adapted by permission from BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. Efficacy and safety of preservative-free latanoprost eyedrops, compared with BAK-preserved latanoprost in patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma, Rouland JF, Traverso CE, Stalmans I, et al; T2345 Study Group. 97(2):196–200. © 2013.Citation34
Figure 3 Hyperemia in patients receiving preservative-added or preservative-free glaucoma medication.

Figure 4 Ocular signs and symptoms in patients receiving preservative-added or preservative-free glaucoma medication.

Notes: A multicenter, single-blind, parallel-group study compared the safety and efficacy of preservative-added and preservative-free latanoprost eye drops in 463 patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension. The graph shows total subjective ocular score (pruritus, burning/stinging, blurred vision, sticky eye sensation, eye dryness sensation, foreign body sensation) during 84 days of treatment (**p<0.01). Adapted by permission from BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. Efficacy and safety of preservative-free latanoprost eyedrops, compared with BAK-preserved latanoprost in patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma, Rouland JF, Traverso CE, Stalmans I, et al; T2345 Study Group. 97(2):196–200. © 2013.Citation34
Figure 4 Ocular signs and symptoms in patients receiving preservative-added or preservative-free glaucoma medication.

Figure 5 Reduction in ocular symptoms following switch from preservative-added eye drops to preservative-free eye drops.

Notes: In an open, prospective clinical trial, 435 glaucoma patients were switched from their previous preservative-added timolol medication to a preservative-free timolol preparation. Ocular symptoms at and between instillation were recorded during 84 days of treatment (*p<0.01). Reproduced from Bron A, Chiambaretta F, Pouliquen P, Rigal D, Rouland JF. Efficacy and safety of substituting a twice-daily regimen of timolol with a single daily instillation of nonpreserved beta-blocker in patients with chronic glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Français D’Ophtalmologie 2003; volume 26, issue 7:pages 668–674. Copyright © 2003, Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.Citation26
Figure 5 Reduction in ocular symptoms following switch from preservative-added eye drops to preservative-free eye drops.

Figure 6 Reduction in clinical signs following switch from preservative-added to preservative-free eye drops.

Notes: In an open, prospective clinical trial, 435 glaucoma patients were switched from their previous preservative-added timolol medication to a preservative-free timolol preparation. Clinical signs were recorded during 84 days of treatment (*p<0.01, **p<0.05). Reproduced from Bron A, Chiambaretta F, Pouliquen P, Rigal D, Rouland JF. Efficacy and safety of substituting a twice-daily regimen of timolol with a single daily instillation of nonpreserved beta-blocker in patients with chronic glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Français D’Ophtalmologie 2003; volume 26, issue 7:pages 668–674. Copyright © 2003, Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.Citation26
Figure 6 Reduction in clinical signs following switch from preservative-added to preservative-free eye drops.

Figure 7 Proportion of patients experiencing symptoms between eye drop instillations.

Notes: In a cross-sectional epidemiologic survey, 164 patients suffering from glaucoma treated with topical prostaglandins were queried regarding their experience of ocular symptoms between eye drop instillations. Chart shows the proportion of patients reporting each symptom. Copyright ©2015. Dove Medical Press. Reproduced from Lemij HG, Hoevenaars JG, van der Windt C, Baudouin C. Patient satisfaction with glaucoma therapy: reality or myth? Clin Ophthalmol. 2015;9:785–793.Citation49
Figure 7 Proportion of patients experiencing symptoms between eye drop instillations.

Figure 8 Emergence of ocular symptoms on commencement of glaucoma treatment.

Notes: In a cross-sectional epidemiologic survey, 164 patients suffering from glaucoma treated with topical prostaglandins were queried regarding their experience of ocular symptoms between eye drop instillations. Chart shows the proportion of patients reporting each symptom before and after the commencement of glaucoma treatment. Copyright ©2015. Dove Medical Press. Reproduced from Lemij HG, Hoevenaars JG, van der Windt C, Baudouin C. Patient satisfaction with glaucoma therapy: reality or myth? Clin Ophthalmol. 2015;9:785–793.Citation49
Abbreviation: MGD, meibomian gland dysfunction.
Figure 8 Emergence of ocular symptoms on commencement of glaucoma treatment.