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 moxifloxacin and levofloxacin in an epithelial disorder model using cultured rabbit corneal epithelial cell sheets.
    Author: Miyake T, Ito N, Tajima K, Goto H, Furukawa T.
    Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2012 Jul; 250(7):1035-41. PubMed ID: 22282216.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: When ophthalmic drug solutions are developed and clinically applied, their influence on corneal epithelium is an important issue. In the past, cells obtained by monolayer culture in vitro were used for evaluation of such influence. We recently created an experimental model of cell damage repair closer to the live body than conventional models by using layered sheets of cultured corneal epithelium. The present study was undertaken to evaluate the influence of ophthalmic moxifloxacin hydrochloride (MFLX) solution in comparison to that of ophthalmic levofloxacin (LVFX) solution using this model. METHODS: Corneal epithelium cells were collected from corneal tissue specimens of white rabbits and subjected to air-lift culture to induce layering. Epithelial cell defects were created by a sponge soaked in 1 N aqueous sodium hydroxide. After removal of the sponge, either ophthalmic MFLX solution or ophthalmic LVFX solution was dropped onto the specimens three times daily (washed 1 min after each dose, followed by continuation of air-lifting culture). The percentage of the defective area repaired (percent defect repair) was evaluated. Each of the ophthalmic MFLX solution and the ophthalmic LVFX solution was used after the stock solution was diluted fourfold (1:4). Drug-free culture medium served as the negative control. Benzalconium chloride solution (BAC) 0.01% served as the positive control. RESULTS: In the negative control group, complete repair of the defect with epithelial cells was seen 4 days after the start of treatment. In the positive control group, repair was suppressed. In the MFLX group and the LVFX group, the defect was repaired at each drug concentration, showing no significant difference from the negative control group. Thus, in this study using layered sheets of cultured corneal epithelium (a model closer to the living body than conventional models), the corneal epithelial defect was repaired in the ophthalmic MFLX solution treatment group and the ophthalmic LVFX solution treatment group to a degree similar to that in the negative control group. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that neither MLFX nor LVFX suppresses repair of corneal epithelial damage.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]