3.8 Review

Over-the-Counter Ocular Decongestants in the United States - Mechanisms of Action and Clinical Utility for Management of Ocular Redness

期刊

CLINICAL OPTOMETRY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 95-105

出版社

DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2147/OPTO.S259398

关键词

brimonidine; naphazoline; ocular redness; ocular decongestant; over-the-counter; tetrahydrozoline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To manage ocular redness effectively, health-care practitioners require an understanding of the pathophysiology, clinical features and differential diagnosis of ocular redness, as well as comprehensive knowledge of medical therapies available and their pharmacologic properties. This review aims to provide a clinically relevant summary of the current literature on the mechanism of action, efficacy, and safety of current over-the-counter (OTC) decongestants available for reduction of ocular redness due to minor irritations. Currently marketed OTC products indicated for such use in the United States include topical solutions of tetrahydrozoline 0.05%, naphazoline 0.012% to 0.03%, and brimonidine 0.025%. All 3 agents are adrenergic receptor agonists but vary in their receptor-binding profiles: tetrahydrozoline is a selective alpha 1 receptor agonist; naphazoline is a mixed alpha 1/alpha 2 receptor agonist; and brimonidine is a selective alpha 2 receptor agonist. These OTC decongestants produce vasoconstriction of conjunctival blood vessels, which results in a rapid reduction in ocular redness. In general, ocular adverse events reported in published studies of these OTC decongestants were minimal, mild, and transient, with no significant adverse systemic effects. However, ocular decongestants with alpha 1-adrenergic receptor agonist activity can be associated with loss of effectiveness with continued use (ie, tachyphylaxis) and rebound redness upon treatment discontinuation. In clinical trials of the selective alpha 2-adrenergic receptor agonist brimonidine 0.025%, tachyphylaxis was not observed, and rebound redness was rarely reported.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据