These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of topical cyclosporine, punctal occlusion, and a combination for the treatment of dry eye.
    Author: Roberts CW, Carniglia PE, Brazzo BG.
    Journal: Cornea; 2007 Aug; 26(7):805-9. PubMed ID: 17667613.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of topical cyclosporine, punctal occlusion, and a combination for the treatment of dry eye. METHODS: Patients with dry eye (N = 30) seen in a university-affiliated private practice were randomized to 1 of 3 treatments: cyclosporine 0.05% ophthalmic emulsion (RESTASIS) twice daily, lower-lid punctal plugs (PARASOL), or a plugs-cyclosporine combination. Tear volume, ocular surface staining, and artificial tear use were assessed at baseline and 1, 3, and 6 months. RESULTS: All treatments improved Schirmer scores by 6 months (P < or = 0.005 vs. baseline), with plug-containing regimens favored at 1 and 3 months (P < 0.001 vs. cyclosporine alone). Cyclosporine-containing regimens, but not plugs alone, improved rose bengal staining at 3 and 6 months (P < or = 0.010 vs. baseline). Artificial tear use decreased with plug-containing regimens at 1 month and with all treatments at 3 and 6 months (P < or = 0.005 vs. baseline). Combination therapy produced the greatest overall improvements and was superior to plugs alone in decreasing artificial tear use at 6 months (P = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: All 3 regimens effectively treated dry eye. Plug-containing regimens increased wetness initially; cyclosporine appeared to promote long-term ocular surface health. The effects may be additive. Patients with punctal occlusion may benefit from adjunctive cyclosporine.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]