Department of Ophthalmology, Canakkale Onsekiz Mart University , Canakkale , Turkey.
Curr Eye Res. 2013 Nov;38(11):1095-103. doi: 10.3109/02713683.2013.806670. Epub 2013 Jul 10.
To evaluate the effects of different artificial tear eye drops on Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), tear osmolarity, Schirmer's I test, and tear break-up time (TBUT) in patients with dry eye disease.
This 12-week, single-institution, single-masked, randomized, pilot study was conducted in Turkey between March and July 2012 in patients with dry eye. Patients were randomly assigned to receive Systane® for their right eye and Eyestil® for their left eye or to receive Tears Naturale II® for their right eye and Refresh Tears® for their left eyes. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and weeks 2, 4 and 12 after treatment initiation.
Twenty-two patients received Systane (right eye) and Eyestil (left eye) and 21 patients received Tears Naturale (right eye) and Refresh (left eye). At each visit and for each outcome, each treatment group demonstrated a significant improvement from baseline (p < 0.001); however, none of these outcomes were significantly different among treatment groups at any visit. At week 12, the mean OSDI improvement was similar between the Systane/Eyestil group (-26.4 ± 10.6) and the Tears Naturale/Refresh group (-27.6 ± 14.8). The mean tear osmolarity decrease (mOsm/L) at week 12 was -33.8 ± 8.3 for Eyestil, -30.3 ± 9.2 for Refresh, -28.4 ± 8.2 for Systane and -25.7 ± 13.1 for Tears Naturale. The mean Schirmer's test increase at week 12 (mm/5 min) was 6.7 ± 3.4 for Eyestil, 6.4 ± 2.9 for Systane, 4.7 ± 2.4 for Tears Naturale and 4.7 ± 2.8 for Refresh. The mean TBUT increase at week 12 (s) was 7.0 ± 3.4 for Systane, 6.1 ± 3.3 for Eyestil, 5.8 ± 2.3 for Tears Naturale, and 5.6 ± 2.8 for Refresh.
All four artificial tear formulations were effective in relieving dry eye signs and symptoms. Although the greatest improvement in two of the objective tests was achieved by Eyestil, the drug with the lowest osmolality, differences among the four artificial tear eye drops were not statistically significant.
评估不同人工泪液滴眼剂对干眼症患者眼表疾病指数(OSDI)、泪液渗透压、泪液分泌试验(Schirmer 试验)和泪膜破裂时间(TBUT)的影响。
这是一项在 2012 年 3 月至 7 月期间在土耳其进行的为期 12 周、单机构、单盲、随机、先导性研究,纳入了干眼症患者。患者被随机分配接受 Systane®右眼和 Eyestil®左眼治疗,或接受 Tears Naturale II®右眼和 Refresh Tears®左眼治疗。在治疗开始后的基线、第 2、4 和 12 周评估结局。
22 例患者接受 Systane(右眼)和 Eyestil(左眼)治疗,21 例患者接受 Tears Naturale(右眼)和 Refresh(左眼)治疗。在每次就诊和每种结局中,每个治疗组均与基线相比均有显著改善(p<0.001);然而,在任何就诊时,各组之间的这些结局均无显著差异。在第 12 周时,Systane/Eyestil 组(-26.4±10.6)和 Tears Naturale/Refresh 组(-27.6±14.8)的 OSDI 改善均值相似。第 12 周时 Eyestil 的平均泪液渗透压降低(mOsm/L)为-33.8±8.3,Refresh 为-30.3±9.2,Systane 为-28.4±8.2,Tears Naturale 为-25.7±13.1。第 12 周时 Eyestil 的 Schirmer 试验增加均值(mm/5min)为 6.7±3.4,Systane 为 6.4±2.9,Tears Naturale 为 4.7±2.4,Refresh 为 4.7±2.8。第 12 周时 Systane 的平均 TBUT 增加(s)为 7.0±3.4,Eyestil 为 6.1±3.3,Tears Naturale 为 5.8±2.3,Refresh 为 5.6±2.8。
四种人工泪液制剂均能有效缓解干眼的体征和症状。尽管 Eyestil 在两项客观测试中取得了最大的改善,但药物渗透压最低,四种人工泪液滴眼剂之间的差异无统计学意义。