Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2020
Loteprednol etabonate gel 0.5% vs prednisolone acetate suspension 1% for the treatment of inflammation after cataract surgery in children.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеEquivalence TrialНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Vittitow Jason L, Williams Jon I
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare loteprednol etabonate (LE) gel 0.5% with prednisolone acetate suspension (PA) 1% for the treatment of inflammation after cataract surgery in children.
SETTING: Eleven sites in the United States.
DESIGN: Randomized, double-masked, parallel-group, noninferiority study.
METHODS: Eligible patients were aged 11 years or younger and candidates for routine, uncomplicated cataract surgery. Patients were randomized to a 4-week postsurgical regimen with LE gel 0.5% or PA 1%, twice on the day of surgery, 4 times daily for 2 weeks, twice daily for 1 week, and once daily for 1 week. Assessments included anterior chamber (AC) cells/flare, anterior chamber inflammation (ACI), synechiae, precipitates on the intraocular lens/cornea, visual acuity, and intraocular pressure.
RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population comprised 105 patients (LE gel, n = 53; PA 1%, n = 52) including 52 patients aged 3 years or younger. Patients achieved a similar mean ACI grade on postoperative day 14 (primary efficacy endpoint) whether treated with LE gel 0.5% or PA 1% (difference = 0.006, 2-sided 95% CI, -0.281 to 0.292). Similar ACI outcomes additionally were observed in patients aged 3 years or younger. LE gel 0.5% and PA 1% also appeared equally effective in resolving inflammation at all visits (days 7, 14, and 28 postsurgery), based on categorical distributions of ACI, AC cells, and AC flare scores/grades (P ≥ .06). Synechiae and corneal/IOL precipitates occurred infrequently with no significant differences between groups. No safety or tolerability concerns were identified, including no treatment-related IOP increases.
CONCLUSIONS: LE gel 0.5% was safe and effective in treating pediatric postcataract surgical inflammation, with similar outcomes as PA 1%.
SETTING: Eleven sites in the United States.
DESIGN: Randomized, double-masked, parallel-group, noninferiority study.
METHODS: Eligible patients were aged 11 years or younger and candidates for routine, uncomplicated cataract surgery. Patients were randomized to a 4-week postsurgical regimen with LE gel 0.5% or PA 1%, twice on the day of surgery, 4 times daily for 2 weeks, twice daily for 1 week, and once daily for 1 week. Assessments included anterior chamber (AC) cells/flare, anterior chamber inflammation (ACI), synechiae, precipitates on the intraocular lens/cornea, visual acuity, and intraocular pressure.
RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population comprised 105 patients (LE gel, n = 53; PA 1%, n = 52) including 52 patients aged 3 years or younger. Patients achieved a similar mean ACI grade on postoperative day 14 (primary efficacy endpoint) whether treated with LE gel 0.5% or PA 1% (difference = 0.006, 2-sided 95% CI, -0.281 to 0.292). Similar ACI outcomes additionally were observed in patients aged 3 years or younger. LE gel 0.5% and PA 1% also appeared equally effective in resolving inflammation at all visits (days 7, 14, and 28 postsurgery), based on categorical distributions of ACI, AC cells, and AC flare scores/grades (P ≥ .06). Synechiae and corneal/IOL precipitates occurred infrequently with no significant differences between groups. No safety or tolerability concerns were identified, including no treatment-related IOP increases.
CONCLUSIONS: LE gel 0.5% was safe and effective in treating pediatric postcataract surgical inflammation, with similar outcomes as PA 1%.