PurposeTo compare the 24-hour (24h) effects on intraocular pressure (IOP) and cardiovascular parameters of timolol 0.5% and bimatoprost 0.01% in open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertensive subjects.MethodsIn this prospective, randomized, double masked, crossover, clinical trial, after washout from previous medications enrolled subjects underwent 24h IOP, blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) measurements and were randomized to either topical bimatoprost 0.01% at night plus placebo in the morning or to timolol 0.5% bid. After 8 weeks of treatment a second 24h assessment of IOP, BP and HR was performed and then subjects switched to the opposite treatment for additional 8 weeks when a third 24h assessment was performed. The primary endpoint was the comparison of the mean 24h IOP after each treatment. Secondary endpoints included the comparisons of IOP at each timepoint of the 24h curve and the comparison of BP, HR, ocular perfusion pressure and tolerability.ResultsMean untreated 24h IOP was 20.3 mmHg (95%CI 19.0 to 21.6). Mean 24h IOP was significantly lower after 8 weeks of treatment with bimatoprost 0.01% than after 8 weeks of treatment with timolol 0.5% bid (15.7 vs 16.8 mmHg, p = 0.0003). Mean IOP during the day hours was significantly reduced from baseline by both drugs while mean IOP during the night hours was reduced by -2.3 mmHg (p = 0.0002) by bimatoprost 0.01% plus placebo and by -1.1 mmHg by timolol 0.5% bid (p = 0.06). Timolol 0.5% significantly reduced the mean 24h systolic BP from baseline, the diastolic BP during the day hours, the HR during the night hours, and the mean 24h systolic ocular perfusion pressure.ConclusionBoth Bimatoprost 0.01% and Timolol 0.5% are effective in reducing the mean 24h IOP from an untreated baseline but Bimatoprost 0.01% is more effective than timolol 0.5% throughout the 24h. Timolol 0.5% effect on IOP is reduced during the night hours and is associated with reduced BP, HR and ocular perfusion pressure.Trial RegistrationEU Clinical Trial Register and EudraCT# 2010-024272-26
BackgroundSpectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) provides fast scan speed and high scan resolution improving its diagnostic accuracy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate if SD-OCT measurements and their quality score are influenced by pupil dilation.MethodsRetinal nerve fiber layer thickness (RNFL), ganglion cell complex (GCC) and optic nerve head (ONH) were measured in one eye of 57 glaucoma patients and 36 healthy subjects using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) before and after pupil dilation. Comparisons were made between measurements and their quality score pre- and post dilation (Signal Strength Index, SSI). Overall RNFL, average GCC and ONH rim volume were considered in the analysis.ResultsNo statistically significant differences were found between pre- and post-dilation measurements in both groups (glaucoma: RNFL 80 ± 15 μm vs 80 ± 16 μm, p = 0.87; GCC 81.35 ± 13.4 μm vs 81.10 ± 13.14 μm, p = 0.92; ONH 0.05 ± 0.11 mm3 vs 0.04 ± 0.07 mm3, p = 0.74; controls RNFL 99 ± 12 μm vs 98 ± 14 μm, p = 0.70; GCC 92.12 ± 6.7 μm vs 91.54 ± 7.05 μm, p = 0.72; ONH 0.11 ± 0.1 mm3 vs 0.04 ± 0.07 mm3, p = 0.36) nor between pre- and post-dilation quality score (glaucoma SSI RNFL 54.3 ± 10.3 vs 51.7 ± 18.1, p = 0.12; SSI GCC 58 ± 9.5 vs 57 ± 8.09, p = 0.55; SSI ONH 48.5 ± 7.6 vs 46.6 ± 7.2, p = 0.16; controls SSI RNFL 57 ± 10.3 vs 54 ± 9.31, p = 0.2; SSI GCC 60.9 ± 8.1 vs 58.8 ± 7.3, p = 0.3; SSI ONH 51.5 ± 8.9 vs 50.4 ± 8.3, p = 0.59).ConclusionPupil dilation doesn’t affect SD-OCT measurements and their quality score.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.