4.6 Article

Effects of the topical treatment with NSAIDs on corneal sensitivity and ocular surface of Sjogren's syndrome patients

Journal

EYE
Volume 19, Issue 5, Pages 535-539

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.eye.6701537

Keywords

indomethacin; diclofenac; corneal sensitivity; corneal epithelial defects; Sjogren's syndrome

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim and purpose To evaluate the effects of two NSAIDs on corneal sensitivity and ocular surface in Sjogren's syndrome (SS) patients. Methods In all, 20 SS patients with epithelial corneal defects, were randomly divided into two groups: group 1 (10 females, age 35-63 years), treated with 0.1% indomethacin, one drop three times a day; group 2 (nine females, one male, age 38-65 years) treated with 0.1% diclofenac, at the same regimen. No systemic NSAIDs were allowed. Use of tear substitute was allowed. Corneal sensitivity, corneal staining, BUT, and ocular discomfort, were evaluated before and after 15, 30 days of treatment and 7 days after NSAID discontinuation. For statistical analysis, the Student's t-test and Mann-Whitney U test were used. Results Both groups showed at day 30 a statistically significant reduction of corneal sensitivity (P<0.05), although the diclofenac-treated group showed a statistically significant lower sensitivity if compared to the indomethacin-treated group (P<0.05). Corneal fluorescein score showed a statistically significantly worst alteration in group 2, 7 days after the discontinuation of the therapy (P=0.02). The ocular discomfort score was statistically significantly reduced in both groups starting from day 15 (P<0.05). Discussion The results indicate that NSAIDs can be useful in resolving symptoms of ocular discomfort in SS patients. However, they should be used with caution and under close monitoring, and the treatment should be promptly discontinued if corneal epithelial defects develop or worsen during treatment.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available