拉坦前列素、曲伏前列素和噻吗洛尔治疗原发性开角型青光眼的疗效比较分析

目的：比较拉坦前列素、曲伏前列素及噻吗洛尔滴眼液治疗原发性开角型青光眼（ POAG）的效果。方法将收治的120例患者随机分为A、B、C组,每组均为40例,其中A 组患者给予拉坦前列素滴眼液;B组患者给予曲伏前列素滴眼液;C组患者给予马来酸噻吗洛尔滴眼液,A、B组均为每天晚上约20：00给药1次,每次1滴,疗程为4周,C组为每天早上约08：00给药1次,每次1滴,疗程为4周。结果三组患者治疗前比较,眼压无统计学差异（ P ＞0．05）,三组患者用药治疗4周眼压值均有显著下降,用药前后差异具有统计学意义（ P ＜0．05）;拉坦前列素和曲伏前列素两种滴眼液组间治疗无显著性差异（ P ＞0．05）,但与噻吗洛尔治疗分别进行组间效果比对具有显著性差异（ P ＜0．05）。结论拉坦前列素、曲伏前列素及噻吗洛尔滴眼液治疗POAG在一个疗程内（4周）均能有效降低眼压,疗效持久,且两种前列素降眼压作用明显优于噻吗洛尔滴眼液治疗效果。     

噻吗洛尔或卡替洛尔联合曲伏前列素的降眼压作用及对心血管系统的影响

目的比较噻吗洛尔与卡替洛尔分别联合曲伏前列素对原发性开角型青光眼（POAG）或高眼压症（OHT）患者的降眼压作用及对心血管系统的影响。方法随机双盲对照试验。将纳入的162例患者随机分为噻吗洛尔组和卡替洛尔组,噻吗洛尔组患者使用噻吗洛尔滴眼液联合曲伏前列素滴眼液点眼;卡替洛尔组患者使用卡替洛尔滴眼液联合曲伏前列素滴眼液点眼。在患者治疗后第14天、28天进行疗效评价及心血管不良反应、其他药物不良反应评价。采用重复测量资料的方差分析对数据进行比较。结果2组患者治疗前人口基线特征差异均无统计学意义。2组患者用药后14、28 d与治疗前比较,眼压均下降（P＜0.05）,组间差异无统计学意义。用药后28 d,2组心率均下降（P＜0.05）,噻吗洛尔组较卡替洛尔组的心率抑制作用明显（P＜0.05）;22∶00-04∶00时间段内患者心率与治疗前相比差异具有统计学意义（P＜0.05）;噻吗洛尔组心率过缓发生率增加,而卡替洛尔组下降,00∶00-04∶00时间段内卡替洛尔组心动过缓的发生率低于噻吗洛尔组（χ²=4.077,P＜0.05）。治疗后收缩压、舒张压均下降,治疗前后差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）,组间差异无统计学意义。结论对于POAG或OHT患者,噻吗洛尔或卡替洛尔联合曲伏前列素均具有较好的降眼压效果。在22∶00以后,卡替洛尔联合曲伏前列素引起心动过缓和心率下降的比率较低。     

曲伏前列素和噻吗心安治疗开角型青光眼和高眼压症的对照研究

目的:以噻吗心安为对照,观察曲伏前列素滴眼液降眼压效果及安全性。方法:采用随机对照法,0.04g/L曲伏前列素滴眼液1次/d或5g/L噻吗心安滴眼液2次/d,治疗原发性开角型青光眼和高眼压症,共34例,疗程12wk,观察眼压及不良反应。未发现其他眼部改变和全身副作用。结果:试验组平均日间眼压以24.83±2.97mmHg降至16.13±2.92mmHg;对照组从23.96±3.62mmHg降至16.14±2.97mmHg。试验组结膜充血较对照组明显增加。结论:曲伏前列素滴眼液对控制原发性开角型青光眼和高眼压症的眼压是有效和安全的。     

曲伏前列素滴眼液(速为坦)治疗原发性开角型青光眼和高眼压症的临床研究

目的观察曲伏前列素滴眼液(速为坦)降眼压效果及安全性。方法采用随机、单盲、平行对照试验,选取原发性开角型青光眼和高眼压症患者,试验组入选24例(24只眼)滴用曲伏前列素滴眼液,对照组入选23例(23只眼)滴用拉坦前列素滴眼液(适利达),均为每日1次,共观察4周。观察的指标包括眼压、视力、血压、脉搏、眼部症状和体征以及不良反应。结果1试验组平均日间眼压从(2483±297)mmHg(1mmHg=0133kPa)降至(1613±292)mmHg,最大下降幅度为352%;对照组从(2396±362)mmHg降至(1614±297)mmHg,最大下降幅度为326%。2用药后试验组和对照组结膜充血均有明显增加,试验组的眼痒明显重于对照组,但都不妨碍继续用药。未发现其他眼部改变和全身副作用。结论曲伏前列素滴眼液对控制原发性开角型青光眼和高眼压症的眼压是有效和安全的,可望成为理想的一线抗青光眼药物。     

曲伏前列素滴眼液治疗原发性开角型青光眼和高眼压症

目的：研究曲伏前列素滴眼液治疗原发性开角型青光眼和高眼压症的降眼压效果及安全性。方法：随机选取2013-03/2016-03我院收治的原发性开角型青光眼和高眼压症患者80例80眼,依据不同治疗方法分为两组：曲伏前列素滴眼液组( n=40)和拉坦前列素滴眼液组(n=40),对两组患者的临床疗效、视力、散光度、眼压及不良反应发生情况进行统计分析。结果：曲伏前列素滴眼液组患者治疗的总有效率95%(38/40)显著高于拉坦前列素滴眼液组80%(32/40),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。曲伏前列素滴眼液组患者治疗后视力显著高于拉坦前列素滴眼液组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),散光度、眼压均显著低于拉坦前列素滴眼液组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),不良反应发生率25%(10/40)显著低于拉坦前列素滴眼液组53%(21/40),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论：曲伏前列素滴眼液治疗原发性开角型青光眼和高眼压症比拉坦前列素滴眼液具有较好的降眼压效果及较高的安全性。     

噻吗洛尔和布林佐胺联合曲伏前列素治疗原发性开角型青光眼与高眼压患者的临床研究

目的比较噻吗洛尔和布林佐胺辅助曲伏前列素治疗原发性开角型青光眼(primary open-angle glaucoma,POAG)或高眼压(ocular hypertension,OHT)患者的效果。方法将使用曲伏前列素单剂药物治疗6周后眼压>18mmHg(1kPa=7.5mm-Hg)的POAG及OHT患者随机分为治疗组和对照组。治疗组40例(40眼)加入10g·L-1布林佐胺滴眼液(每日2次),对照组40例(40眼)加入5g·L-1噻吗洛尔滴眼液(每日2次)。随访2周、8周、14周、20周、26周的眼压、血压、心率,观察眼部症状和体征,26周检测与基线对应的相关参量,包括视野、视觉电生理、视网膜神经纤维层厚度、视盘盘沿面积、泪液功能等。计算26周时眼压≤18mmHg患者百分比。结果两组眼压与基线比较均有明显下降,差异均有显著统计学意义(均为P<0.01)。治疗组降眼压持续平稳,对照组眼压于20周后出现上升趋势。24h眼压描记显示治疗组降眼压稳定,昼夜眼压平稳,对照组夜间眼压控制欠佳。2组对患者血压无影响,治疗组对患者心率无影响,对照组在联合用药20周始出现心率抑制。联合用药后对照组视野光敏感度下降,泪膜稳定性下降,治疗组无明显异常。治疗组常见的副作用是眼部刺激症状、味觉异常、口干等,对照组副作用是眼异物感、干涩等。结论曲伏前列素单剂治疗不足时,添加布林佐胺和噻吗洛尔均能进一步降低眼压,布林佐胺长期及短期眼压波动幅度均比噻吗洛尔小,局部及全身副作用小。     

拉坦前列素与噻吗洛尔对慢性闭角型青光眼降眼压作用的早期对照研究

拉坦前列素 (Ｌａｔａｎｏｐｒｏｓｔ)是前列腺素Ｆ2 α的衍生物。业已证实它是一种有效的降眼压药物 ,其作用机制是通过增加葡萄膜巩膜旁道房水引流来降低眼压。长期的研究结果表明对于原发性开角型青光眼和高眼压症患者 0 0 0 5 %拉坦前列素仅每天一次即与 0 5 %噻吗洛尔疗效相当。但拉坦前列素对房角部分或全部关闭的慢性闭角型青光眼患者是否有降眼压作用至今尚不清楚。此研究目的是比较拉坦前列素与噻吗洛尔对慢性闭角型青光眼患者的短期降眼压效果及其安全性。作者以两个中心进行临床随机双盲对照研究 ,对象为 32例慢性闭角型青光眼…     

曲伏前列素对已行超声乳化人工晶状体植入术的POAG患者的眼压控制

目的：观察曲伏前列素滴眼液对已行白内障超声乳化人工晶状体植入术的原发性开角型青光眼患者的降眼压效果及安全性。

方法：采用随机、单盲、平行对照试验,选取白内障超声乳化人工晶状体植入术后的原发性开角型青光眼患者,治疗组入选43例43眼滴用曲伏前列素每日1次,对照组入选43例43眼滴用布林佐胺滴眼液早晚各1次,共观察12wk。观察的指标主要包括眼压、眼部症状以及不良反应等。

结果：治疗组眼压从(24.20±3.01)mmHg降至(16.77±2.89)mmHg; 对照组从(23.87±3.47)mmHg降至(18.81±3.07)mmHg,两组用药前后眼压相比均有显著差异(P<0.01),各时间点两组间眼压相比存在统计学差异(P<0.05)。用药后治疗组结膜充血及眼痒明显重于对照组,但不妨碍继续用药。未发现其他眼部改变和全身副作用。

结论：曲伏前列素对控制已行白内障超声乳化人工晶状体植入术的原发性开角型青光眼的眼压是高效和安全的。     

三种前列腺素类滴眼液治疗原发性开角型青光眼的降眼压效果比较

目的 比较拉坦前列素、曲伏前列素及贝美前列素3种前列腺素类滴眼液治疗原发性开角型青光眼患者4周后的24h降眼压效果。方法 病例对照研究。选取2009年1月至6月门诊就诊的原发性开角型青光眼患者63例（63只眼）。其中拉坦前列素组21例（21只眼）,曲伏前列素组22例（22只眼）,贝美前列素组20例（20只眼）,分别使用相应的滴眼液,均为每日滴药1次,共观察4周,测量用药前后的24h眼压曲线。3组间用药前或用药后24h不同时间点眼压值比较采用两因素重复测量的方差分析,眼压波动幅度比较采用单因素方差分析。结果 3组患者用药4周后眼压均明显下降,拉坦前列素组眼压从(18.9±2.1)mm Hg（1mm Hg =0.133 kPa）降至(15.3±2.7)mm Hg,下降幅度（用药前后眼压差值/用药前眼压值）为19.0％;曲伏前列素组眼压从(19.1±3.1)mm Hg降至(15.3 ±2.1)mm Hg,下降幅度为19.4％;贝美前列素组眼压从(18.6±1.9) mm Hg降至(14.9±1.9)mm Hg,下降幅度为19.9％。波幅下降幅度（用药前后波幅差值/用药前波幅值）,拉坦前列素组为31.0％,曲伏前列素组为31.1％,贝美前列素组为31.9％。用药前及用药后3组间眼压值随时间点变化差异均无统计学意义(F= 1.501,P=0.110),3组间用药后眼压波幅下降幅度差异无统计学意义(F =0.286,P=0.752)。结论 拉坦前列素、曲伏前列素、贝美前列素3种滴眼液对原发性开角型青光眼的昼夜降眼压效果显著且无明显差别。     

2%美开朗与0.5%噻吗心安滴眼液治疗开角型青光眼与高眼压症的临床对照研究

目的以噻吗心安滴眼液作对照,在原发性开角型青光眼和高眼压症患者中评价美开朗滴眼液的降眼压、内在拟交感活性作用。方法选择开角型青光眼和高眼压症患者50例50眼,随机分为美开朗组和噻吗心安组2组,各25例25眼。美开朗组滴用2%美开朗眼液,噻吗心安组滴用0.5%噻吗心安眼液,一日2次,共12周,比较两种滴眼液的降眼压作用及局部和全身副作用。结果两组患者用药后眼压均下降,与用药前相比均有显著性差异(P<0.01)。两组间眼压下降值无显著性差异(P>0.05)。用药12周,美开朗组心率平均降低3.6次,噻吗心安组心率平均降低6.5次,两者相比有显著性差异。结论美开朗滴眼液对开角型青光眼和高眼压症患者具有明显的降眼压作用,和噻吗心安滴眼液局部降眼压作用相同,但对心率的抑制作用比噻吗心安小。     

Efficacy and safety of a fixed combination of travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution once daily for open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of a fixed combination of travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% every day in the morning with a concomitant regimen of timolol 0.5% every day in the morning, plus travoprost 0.004% every day in the evening; and timolol 0.5% twice daily on the intraocular pressure (IOP) of subjects with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension over 3 months. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-masked, parallel-group, active-controlled, multicenter trial. METHODS: Patients comprised adult subjects (n = 403) of either gender with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension in at least one eye. To qualify, the IOP had to be between 22 to 36 mm Hg in the same eye at two consecutive eligibility visits. The primary outcome variable was IOP measured with a Goldmann applanation tonometer. RESULTS: Mean IOP ranged from 16.2 to 17.4 mm Hg with the combination travoprost/timolol compared with 15.4 to 16.8 mm Hg in the concomitant travoprost + timolol group, from baselines of 23.1 to 25.6 mm Hg and 22.9 to 25.0 mm Hg, respectively. The fixed combination of travoprost/timolol significantly lowered IOP by 7 to 9 mm, similar to the IOP reductions observed with concomitant therapy. The most frequent ocular adverse event was hyperemia that occurred in 14.3% and 23.4% of subjects treated with travoprost/timolol combination and concomitant travoprost + timolol, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Travoprost/timolol combination produces greater IOP reductions than the positive control, timolol 0.5%, and reductions that were similar to concomitant travoprost + timolol. This study demonstrates that the fixed combination of travoprost/timolol produces significant and clinically relevant reductions of IOP in a once-daily dosing regimen.     

Travoprost compared with other prostaglandin analogues or timolol in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND: It is still uncertain whether travoprost has comparable or better efficacy compared with other prostaglandin analogues or timolol in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. The authors performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate the incidence of reported side-effects and intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effect of travoprost versus other prostaglandin analogues (latanaprost, bimatoprost, unoprostone) or timolol. METHODS: Systematic literature retrieval was conducted in Pubmed, EMBASE, Chinese Bio-medicine Database and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register to identify the potentially relevant randomized controlled trials. The statistical analysis was performed by RevMan 4.1 software that was provided by the Cochrane Collaboration. The outcome measures were the incidence of reported side-effects (hyperaemia, iris pigmentation, eyelash changes) and mean IOP pooled over treatment visits. RESULTS: In total, 12 articles involving 3048 patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension were included in this meta-analysis. The combined results showed that travoprost 0.004% was more effective than timolol or travoprost 0.0015% in lowering IOP, but not more effective than bimatoprost or latanoprost. Travoprost 0.004% caused a higher percentage of hyperaemia than timolol, latanoprost, or travoprost 0.0015%. There was an increased incidence of pigmentation with travoprost than timolol. Travoprost 0.004% caused a higher percentage of eyelash changes than timolol, latanoprost, or travoprost 0.0015%. CONCLUSION: According to data available, travoprost is more effective than timolol in lowering IOP in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Compared with other prostaglandin analogues, travoprost appears to be equivalent to bimatoprost and latanoprost. Although a limited number of local side-effects were reported, no serious treatment-related side-effects were reported.     

Comparison of travoprost 0.0015% and 0.004% with timolol 0.5% in patients with elevated intraocular pressure: a 6-month, masked, multicenter trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy of once-daily travoprost (0.0015% and 0.004%) to twice-daily timolol 0.5%. DESIGN: Prospective, 6-month, randomized, controlled, multicenter, double-masked, phase III study. PARTICIPANTS: Six hundred five patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. METHODS: Patients with an 8 AM IOP between 24 to 36 mmHg in at least one eye (the same eye) at two eligibility visits received either travoprost 0.0015%, travoprost 0.004% (dosed every day), or timolol 0.5% (dosed twice daily). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean IOP at 8 AM, 10 AM, and 4 PM in the patient's eye with the higher baseline IOP. RESULTS: The mean IOP was significantly lower for both concentrations of travoprost compared with timolol. Travoprost was statistically superior to timolol at 9 of 13 visits, with differences in IOP reductions ranging from 0.9 to 1.8 mmHg (0.0015%) and 10 of 13 visits with differences in IOP reductions from 0.9 to 2.4 mmHg (0.004%). Mean IOP changes from baseline ranged from -6.0 to -7.5 mmHg (0.0015%), -6.5 to -8.0 mmHg (0.004%), and -5.2 to -7.0 mmHg for timolol. Hyperemia was experienced at rates of 29.2% (59 of 202) for travoprost 0.0015%, 42.8% (86 of 201) for travoprost 0.004%, and 8.9% (18 of 202) for timolol. Iris pigmentation changes were observed in 1.0% (2 of 200) of patients receiving travoprost 0.004% with no changes noted in the travoprost 0.0015% group or the timolol group. A decrease in pulse and systolic blood pressure was observed in the timolol group. There were no other clinically relevant or statistically significant changes from baseline in ocular signs or laboratory values, and no serious, related, unexpected adverse events were reported for any group. CONCLUSIONS: Travoprost (0.0015% and 0.004%), dosed once daily in the evening, is statistically superior or equal to timolol 0.5% dosed twice daily at all treatment visits during this 6-month study. IOP reductions of up to 2.0 mmHg greater than timolol were found in the travoprost 0.004% pooled data group. Travoprost is safe and well tolerated in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.     

Comparison of topical travoprost eye drops given once daily and timolol 0.5% given twice daily in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.

PURPOSE: This 9-month study compared the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy and safety of once-daily travoprost ophthalmic solutions (0.0015% and 0.004%) with twice-daily timolol 0.5%. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study was conducted using a double-masked, randomized, parallel-group design; adult patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension (IOP between 24 and 36 mm Hg, inclusive at 9 am and between 21 and 36 mm Hg, inclusive, at 11 am and 4 pm on two eligibility visits after an appropriate washout of previous treatments). In both eyes, the travoprost vehicle (placebo) was instilled at 9 am and travoprost (0.0015% or 0.004%) was instilled at 9 pm, or timolol 0.5% was instilled at both times. The primary efficacy variable was mean IOP measured at 9 am, 11 am, and 4 pm at baseline and follow-up visits. RESULTS: Five hundred seventy-three patients were randomized to the study treatments. Mean IOP, which was combined across study visits, was lower with travoprost 0.004% than with timolol 0.5% at 9 am (P = 0.0246), 11 am (P = 0.0039), and 4 pm (P = 0.0004). Intraocular pressure was lower with travoprost 0.004% than with travoprost 0.0015% at 11 am (P = 0.0314), the time of peak drug activity. Mean IOP was consistently lower with travoprost 0.0015% than with timolol 0.5%. Mean IOP reductions from baseline were significantly (P less than equal 0.0001) greater with travoprost 0.004% (8.0-8.9 mm Hg) than with timolol 0.5% (6.3-7.9 mm Hg). The most frequent related adverse events were hyperemia, pruritus, discomfort, pain, and iris pigmentation changes. The local tolerance was better in the timolol group compared with patients receiving travoprost. There were no serious unexpected treatment-related adverse events in any group. CONCLUSIONS: Travoprost 0.004% reduced diurnal mean intraocular pressure significantly more than timolol 0.5%. Both concentrations of travoprost were well tolerated and safe for use in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.     

A three-month, multicenter, double-masked study of the safety and efficacy of travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution compared to travoprost 0.004% ophthalmic solution and timolol 0.5% dosed concomitantly in subjects with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension

PURPOSE: The primary objective of this study was to compare the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy of travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% fixed combination to the concomitant administration of travoprost 0.004% (TRAVATAN) and timolol 0.5% in subjects with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. METHODS: This was a randomized, multicenter, double-masked, active-controlled, parallel group study. Three hundred sixteen patients with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension were randomly assigned to travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution fixed combination once daily in the morning or concomitant administration of timolol 0.5% once daily in the morning and travoprost 0.004% ophthalmic solution once daily in the evening. The efficacy and safety of the fixed combination were compared with concomitant therapy over three months. The primary efficacy outcome measure was mean intraocular pressure. RESULTS: Both travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% fixed combination and the concomitant administration of travoprost 0.004% and timolol 0.5% produced statistically significant reductions from baseline in IOP, with mean IOP ranging from 15.2 to 16.5 mm Hg in the patients using travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% fixed combination compared with 14.7 to 16.1 mm Hg in the concomitant group. The upper 95.1% confidence limit for the differences in mean IOP (fixed combination minus concomitant) was < or =1.5 mm Hg at 7 of 9 visits, including all three 8 AM time points, 24-hours post-dose. Mean IOP reductions from baseline ranged from 7.4 to 9.4 mm Hg in the fixed combination group compared with 8.4 to 9.4 mm Hg with concomitant therapy. Safety analysis demonstrated equivalent safety between the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: A fixed combination of travoprost 0.004% and timolol 0.5% produced clinically relevant IOP reductions in patients with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension that were comparable to concomitant therapy with its components. Safety and tolerability of the fixed combination were also equivalent to concomitant therapy. Travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% fixed combination offers IOP reduction equivalent to concomitant therapy, with potential benefits that include convenience (fewer bottles and drops per day), improved compliance, cost savings (based on fewer co-payments), and elimination of potential washout effects.     

A comparison of travoprost, latanoprost, and the fixed combination of dorzolamide and timolol in patients with pseudoexfoliation glaucoma

PURPOSE: To compare the intraocular pressure (IOP) lowering effect and safety of latanoprost, travoprost given every evening, and the fixed combination dorzolamide + timolol (DTFC) given twice daily in pseudoexfoliation glaucoma (PXG). METHODS: This randomized, prospective, investigator-masked study has been conducted with 50 PXG patients. Patients were assigned to one of three groups: travoprost 0.004%, fixed combination of dorzolamide 2%+timolol 0.5%, or latanoprost 0.005% for 6 months. At baseline and 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 months of therapy, IOP (8 am, 10 am, 4 pm), blood pressures, and pulse rates were measured, and ophthalmologic examination was performed. The side effects were recorded at each visit. RESULTS: Forty-two of the 50 patients initially enrolled completed this study. Withdrawn patients included one (latanoprost) for lack of efficacy, five (three travoprost, one latanoprost, one DTFC) for adverse events, and two (one latanoprost, one DTFC) for loss of follow-up. Each of the three drugs considerably reduced the IOP in PXG cases throughout the 6 months. Mean IOP reduction at 6 months was -9.3+/-2.9 mmHg in the travoprost group, -8.2+/-1.2 mmHg in the latanoprost group, and 11.5+/-3.3 mmHg in the DTFC group. Comparing the groups, DTFC is more effective than latanoprost and travoprost in lowering IOP (p<0.05). There was no difference between travoprost and latanoprost. The most common treatment-related adverse event was conjunctival hyperemia. Intensity of ocular hyperemia was greater in the travoprost group compared with the latanoprost and DTFC groups (p<0.05). There were no significant effects on systemic safety parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated that DTFC is more effective in reducing IOP than latanoprost and travoprost. Latanoprost and travoprost had similar ocular hypotensive effects in patients with PXG. All three drugs were well tolerated; there were fewer ocular side effects attributable in the latanoprost group.     

拉坦前列素和噻吗心安治疗开角型青光眼、高眼压症的对照研究

目的：观察Ｌａｔａｎｏｐｒｏｓｔ的降眼压效果及安全性。方法：采用随机分组对照组,０．００５％Ｌａｔａｎｏｐｒｏｓｔ每日一次或０．５％Ｔｉｍｏｌｏｌ（噻吗心安）每日２次,治疗原发性开角型青光眼、高眼压症和剥脱性青光眼,共１４例,疗程１２周,观察其眼压及不良反应。结果：Ｌａｔａｎｏｐｒｏｓｔ组和Ｔｉｍｏｌｏｌ组均可有效地降低眼压（Ｐ〈０．０１）,两组间眼压下降值没有差异。两组治疗前后不同时间点眼压下降     

A comparison of morning and evening instillation of a combination travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution

PURPOSE: To compare the intraocular pressure lowering efficacy and side effect profile of travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution dosed in the morning and evening. METHODS: This was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-masked, parallel group clinical study of 92 patients with open-angle glaucoma (with or without pseudoexfoliative or pigmentary glaucoma) or ocular hypertension. After a washout of existing glaucoma medications, patients were randomly assigned to receive one drop of travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% in the morning or evening for 6 weeks. The main outcome measures were mean intraocular pressure (IOP) assessed at 9 am, 11 am, and 4 pm, and safety variables. RESULTS: Travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution, dosed in the morning or evening, controlled IOP consistently throughout the day. Mean IOP ranged from 16.5 to 16.7 mmHg in the morning treatment group and from 16.1 to 17.2 mmHg in the evening treatment group. Travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution produced statistically significant and clinically relevant reductions in IOP from baseline; mean reductions ranged from approximately 8 to 10 mmHg (32% to 38%). Travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution was safe and well tolerated with the most frequently reported adverse event being ocular hyperemia, which occurred in 12.5% of patients in the morning treatment group and 13.6% of patients in the evening treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: Travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% given once daily, either in the morning or evening, is a safe and effective treatment for open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. It may be beneficial for patients judged to be inadequately controlled on a prostaglandin analogue or ophthalmic beta-blocker alone.