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: Comparative analysis of carmellose 0.5% versus hyaluronate 0.15% in dry eye: a flow cytometric study.
    Author: Sanchez MA, Torralbo-Jimenez P, Giron N, de la Heras B, Herrero Vanrell R, Arriola-Villalobos P, Diaz-Valle D, Alvarez-Barrientos A, Benitez-Del-Castillo JM.
    Journal: Cornea; 2010 Feb; 29(2):167-71. PubMed ID: 20023577.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare the effects of Viscofresh 0.5% (carmellose sodium 0. 5%) versus Lubristil (sodium hyaluronate 0.15%) in dry eye syndrome and to study the influence of these two treatments on the expression of various inflammatory markers by flow cytometry in impression cytology specimens. METHODS: In this randomized, masked-observer, parallel group, single-center study, 15 patients with dry eye syndrome were randomized to sodium carmellose 0.5% or sodium hyaluronate 0.15% 1-month treatment after a 1-week washout period. Corneal staining with flurescein, breakup time, Schirmer 1 test with anesthesia (Jones test), and tear clearance were assessed. Besides, conjunctival impression cytology was performed to investigate inflammatory markers (CD3, CD11b, and HLA-DR) using flow cytometry. RESULTS: Carmellose group shows statistical improvement compared with the hyaluronate group in breakup time, corneal staining, and HLA-DR. The two other inflammatory markers had also a tendency for a decreased expression in both groups, with no statistical significance. There were neither visual acuity loss nor other complications related to treatment. CONCLUSION: Both artificial tears improve dry eye signs and symptoms and inflammatory markers expression, with significant better results in carmellose group.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]