Archives of ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill. : 1960) · 1997
Comparison of dorzolamide and acetazolamide as suppressors of aqueous humor flow in humans.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание 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.
Maus T L, Larsson L I, McLaren J W, Brubaker R F
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of topical 2% dorzolamide hydrochloride (Trusopt) as a suppressor of aqueous humor flow in the human eye with the efficacy of systemically administered acetazolamide (Diamox).
DESIGN: A randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled study of 40 human subjects in 2 academic centers. The effect of dorzolamide on aqueous humor flow was compared with that of acetazolamide as measured by the rate of clearance of topically applied fluorescein.
RESULTS: Acetazolamide reduced aqueous flow from 3.18 +/- 0.70 (mean +/- SD) to 2.23 +/- 0.48 microL per minute, a reduction of 30% (P < .001), and dorzolamide reduced the flow to 2.65 +/- 0.64 microL per minute, a reduction of 17% (P < .001). The difference between the effect of acetazolamine and dorzolamide was significant (P < .001). When acetazolamide is added to dorzolamide, the aqueous flow was reduced further to 2.21 +/- 0.47 microL per minute, an additional reduction of 16% (P < .001). When dorzolamide was added to acetazolamide, no additional reduction was observed (P = .73). Similar effects were observed for intraocular pressure. Acetazolamide reduced pressure from 12.5 +/- 2.2 (mean +/- SD) to 10.1 +/- 2.2 mm Hg, a decrease of 19% (P < .001) and dorzolamide reduced it to 10.8 +/- 2.1 mm Hg, or a decrease of 13% (P < .001). The greater effect of acetazolamide than dorzolamide was significant (P = .03).
CONCLUSIONS: For reasons that are not known, the topically applied carbonic anhydrase inhibitor 2% dorzolamide hydrochloride is not as effective as systemically administered acetazolamide. Clinicians who prescribe dorzolamide should expect less of an ocular hypotensive effect than that experienced from systemically administered acetazolamide.
DESIGN: A randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled study of 40 human subjects in 2 academic centers. The effect of dorzolamide on aqueous humor flow was compared with that of acetazolamide as measured by the rate of clearance of topically applied fluorescein.
RESULTS: Acetazolamide reduced aqueous flow from 3.18 +/- 0.70 (mean +/- SD) to 2.23 +/- 0.48 microL per minute, a reduction of 30% (P < .001), and dorzolamide reduced the flow to 2.65 +/- 0.64 microL per minute, a reduction of 17% (P < .001). The difference between the effect of acetazolamine and dorzolamide was significant (P < .001). When acetazolamide is added to dorzolamide, the aqueous flow was reduced further to 2.21 +/- 0.47 microL per minute, an additional reduction of 16% (P < .001). When dorzolamide was added to acetazolamide, no additional reduction was observed (P = .73). Similar effects were observed for intraocular pressure. Acetazolamide reduced pressure from 12.5 +/- 2.2 (mean +/- SD) to 10.1 +/- 2.2 mm Hg, a decrease of 19% (P < .001) and dorzolamide reduced it to 10.8 +/- 2.1 mm Hg, or a decrease of 13% (P < .001). The greater effect of acetazolamide than dorzolamide was significant (P = .03).
CONCLUSIONS: For reasons that are not known, the topically applied carbonic anhydrase inhibitor 2% dorzolamide hydrochloride is not as effective as systemically administered acetazolamide. Clinicians who prescribe dorzolamide should expect less of an ocular hypotensive effect than that experienced from systemically administered acetazolamide.