Journal of glaucoma · 2014
Bimatoprost/timolol versus travoprost/timolol fixed combinations in an Egyptian population: a hospital-based prospective randomized study.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Macky Tamer A
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of bimatoprost/timolol (BTFC) or travoprost/timolol (TTFC) fixed combinations on intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction in an Egyptian population.
METHODS: Patients with primary open angle glaucoma were randomized to receive either BTFC or TTFC. IOPs were measured at baseline, 2 weeks, and 1, 2, 4, and 6 months. The primary outcome measure was the mean change in IOP from baseline at each visit. Secondary outcome measures included the incidence of adverse events.
RESULTS: Eighty patients (80 eyes) were included finally: 40 eyes in each group. Baseline mean IOPs were 24.78±3.53 and 25.26±3.51 mm Hg for BTFC and TTFC, respectively (P=0.344). Both drops provided statistically significant IOP reductions from baseline at all visits (P<0.001). BTFC provided greater significant mean IOP reductions from baseline than TTFC at each visit (P<0.001). Mean IOP reductions were 11.34 and 6.42 mm Hg at 2 weeks (P=0.000), and 11.17 and 7.89 mm Hg at 6 months (P=0.001) for BTFC and TTFC, respectively. IOPs at 2 weeks were ≤18 mm Hg in 36 (90.8%) versus 22 (55%) eyes and ≤16 mm Hg in 28 (70%) versus 16 (40%) eyes (P<0.001), and at 6 months, ≤18 mm Hg in 38 (95%) versus 28 (70%) eyes and ≤16 mm Hg in 30 (75%) versus 18 (45%) eyes for BTFC and TTFC, respectively (P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: Both drops provided effective IOP reduction that was greater and patients were more likely to achieve lower target pressures with BTFC than with TTFC.
METHODS: Patients with primary open angle glaucoma were randomized to receive either BTFC or TTFC. IOPs were measured at baseline, 2 weeks, and 1, 2, 4, and 6 months. The primary outcome measure was the mean change in IOP from baseline at each visit. Secondary outcome measures included the incidence of adverse events.
RESULTS: Eighty patients (80 eyes) were included finally: 40 eyes in each group. Baseline mean IOPs were 24.78±3.53 and 25.26±3.51 mm Hg for BTFC and TTFC, respectively (P=0.344). Both drops provided statistically significant IOP reductions from baseline at all visits (P<0.001). BTFC provided greater significant mean IOP reductions from baseline than TTFC at each visit (P<0.001). Mean IOP reductions were 11.34 and 6.42 mm Hg at 2 weeks (P=0.000), and 11.17 and 7.89 mm Hg at 6 months (P=0.001) for BTFC and TTFC, respectively. IOPs at 2 weeks were ≤18 mm Hg in 36 (90.8%) versus 22 (55%) eyes and ≤16 mm Hg in 28 (70%) versus 16 (40%) eyes (P<0.001), and at 6 months, ≤18 mm Hg in 38 (95%) versus 28 (70%) eyes and ≤16 mm Hg in 30 (75%) versus 18 (45%) eyes for BTFC and TTFC, respectively (P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: Both drops provided effective IOP reduction that was greater and patients were more likely to achieve lower target pressures with BTFC than with TTFC.