Veterinary ophthalmology · 2024
Evaluation of 0.1% and 1% atropine eyedrops in cats: A comparative study of tolerance, stability, and efficacy.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Handel Karin W, Ofri Ron, Goncharov Yulia, Arad Dikla, Sebbag Lionel
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Investigate the tolerance, stability, and efficacy of topical 0.1% and 1% atropine in cats.
PROCEDURES: Six cats underwent two trials separated by a 2-week washout period. One drop of artificial tears was placed in one randomly selected eye (control), and one drop of either 0.1% atropine (Trial I) or 1% atropine (Trial II) was placed in the other eye. Immediate adverse effects were recorded for severity (0-3) and duration (seconds). Horizontal pupil diameter (HPD), pupillary light reflexes (PLRs), intraocular pressure (IOP), Schirmer tear test-1 (STT-1), and heart rate (HR) were monitored at baseline then 8 h post-administration. PLRs were assessed for a total of 72 h. Stability was assessed weekly for 1 month in room temperature and refrigerated conditions, evaluating solution clarity, pH, and drug concentrations.
RESULTS: Adverse effects had a significantly lower severity score and shorter duration with 0.1% versus 1% atropine (severity 1.2 ± 0.4 vs. 2.5 ± 0.5, p = .010; duration 107.5 ± 53.3 vs. 293.3 ± 106.5 s, p = .009). HPD was significantly greater than baseline measurements as early as 40 min for both atropine formulations. Pupils were non-responsive for a significantly shorter duration with 0.1% versus 1% atropine (median 7 h vs. 47.5 h, p = .031). Compared with control eyes, IOP was significantly elevated by 1% atropine (p = .021) but not 0.1% atropine (p = .502). No significant differences were noted in STT-1 and HR measurements. Both solutions were stable in room temperature and refrigerated conditions for 1 month.
CONCLUSIONS: Diluted 0.1% atropine was stable and better tolerated by cats, offering a potential alternative to feline patients that experience adverse effects from topical 1% atropine.
PROCEDURES: Six cats underwent two trials separated by a 2-week washout period. One drop of artificial tears was placed in one randomly selected eye (control), and one drop of either 0.1% atropine (Trial I) or 1% atropine (Trial II) was placed in the other eye. Immediate adverse effects were recorded for severity (0-3) and duration (seconds). Horizontal pupil diameter (HPD), pupillary light reflexes (PLRs), intraocular pressure (IOP), Schirmer tear test-1 (STT-1), and heart rate (HR) were monitored at baseline then 8 h post-administration. PLRs were assessed for a total of 72 h. Stability was assessed weekly for 1 month in room temperature and refrigerated conditions, evaluating solution clarity, pH, and drug concentrations.
RESULTS: Adverse effects had a significantly lower severity score and shorter duration with 0.1% versus 1% atropine (severity 1.2 ± 0.4 vs. 2.5 ± 0.5, p = .010; duration 107.5 ± 53.3 vs. 293.3 ± 106.5 s, p = .009). HPD was significantly greater than baseline measurements as early as 40 min for both atropine formulations. Pupils were non-responsive for a significantly shorter duration with 0.1% versus 1% atropine (median 7 h vs. 47.5 h, p = .031). Compared with control eyes, IOP was significantly elevated by 1% atropine (p = .021) but not 0.1% atropine (p = .502). No significant differences were noted in STT-1 and HR measurements. Both solutions were stable in room temperature and refrigerated conditions for 1 month.
CONCLUSIONS: Diluted 0.1% atropine was stable and better tolerated by cats, offering a potential alternative to feline patients that experience adverse effects from topical 1% atropine.