+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Influence of Latanoprost on the Corneal Epithelial Barrier Function in Glaucoma Patients

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          Aim: To evaluate the influence of topically administered latanoprost, a prostaglandin F<sub>2α</sub> analog, on the corneal epithelial barrier function. Patients and Methods: Twenty-four patients suffering from a glaucoma were enrolled. Ten patients without prior topical antiglaucoma medication received topical latanoprost (0.005%, once daily) for 30 days (monotherapy group); 14 patients receiving topical antiglaucoma medication also received latanoprost (0.005%, once daily) for 180 days (combination treatment group). Before and 30 days after treatment (monotherapy group) and before and 30 and 180 days after treatment (combination group), the corneal epithelial barrier function was measured by a fluorophotometric technique. Results: The fluorescein uptakes in the monotherapy group were 54.6 ± (SE) 7.5 and 57.1 ± 11.0 ng/ml before and 30 days after treatment, respectively (p = 0.81). In the combination group, the uptakes were 101.0 ± 18.3 and 118.9 ± 25.9 ng/ml (p = 0.38) and 93.4 ± 17.5 ng/ml (p = 0.58) before and 30 and 180 days after treatment, respectively. Conclusion: The corneal epithelial barrier function remained intact following the instillation of latanoprost in both groups.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 6

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Anterior uveitis associated with latanoprost.

          To report the association of anterior uveitis with the use of latanoprost. We studied four patients with complicated open-angle glaucoma who had anterior uveitis associated with the use of latanoprost. The uveitis was unilateral and occurred only in the eye receiving latanoprost in three patients. In one patient, latanoprost was used in both eyes, and the uveitis was bilateral. Four of five eyes had a history of prior inflammation and/or prior incisional surgery. All patients were rechallenged with the drug. The uveitis improved after cessation of latanoprost with or without topical corticosteroids. It recurred after rechallenging with latanoprost in all eyes. There is a possible association between latanoprost and anterior uveitis. Topical prostaglandin analogs may be relatively contraindicated in patients with a history of uveitis or prior ocular surgery. This association may also be possible in eyes that have not had previous uveitis or incisional surgery.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Latanoprost: experience of 2-year treatment in Scandinavia.

             A. Alm,  I Widengård (2000)
            The aim of the study was to assess efficacy and side effects of latanoprost during two years of treatment.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The additive effect of latanoprost to maximum-tolerated medications with low-dose, high-dose, or no pilocarpine therapy.

              To assess the efficacy of latanoprost additive therapy in patients with intraocular pressure (IOP) out of control while taking maximum-tolerated medications and to determine whether pilocarpine therapy has a dose-dependent adverse effect on the efficacy of latanoprost therapy. Noncomparative case series. Sixty-one eyes of 61 patients with chronic glaucoma with IOP out of control while receiving maximum-tolerated medications were treated with latanoprost additive therapy on a compassionate basis. Follow-up was up to 22 months with a mean of 13.9 +/- 5.7 months. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with Mantel-Cox log-rank test was performed to determine the overall success of latanoprost additive therapy and to compare the success rates of high-dose pilocarpine, low-dose pilocarpine, and no pilocarpine therapies. The criterion for success was avoiding glaucoma surgery with IOP decrease of 20% or greater and final IOP less than 22 mmHg. The IOP change and its significance for patients satisfying and failing the criterion for success also were determined to assess the latanoprost additive therapy. In addition, a number of pretreatment variables, including pilocarpine therapy, were analyzed for a significant effect on the efficacy of latanoprost additive therapy using Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. Latanoprost additive therapy significantly lowered mean IOP by 3.9 +/- 5.5 mmHg at 3 months and by 3.5 +/- 5.8 mmHg at 12 months. The cumulative success rate of the latanoprost additive therapy was 70% at 1 month, 42% at 3 months, 40% at 6 months, and 30% at 12 months. Of the variables studied, only increased number of previous incisional glaucoma surgeries and IOP greater than 24 mmHg before latanoprost additive therapy were significant prognostic factors for failure of latanoprost additive therapy. Pilocarpine therapy in any dose had no significant effect. This study supports a trial of latanoprost additive therapy before glaucoma surgery in patients with IOP out of control while receiving maximum-tolerated medications irrespective of pilocarpine therapy and the pilocarpine dosage, especially when the number of previous incisional glaucoma surgery is less than three and the IOP is less than 25 mmHg.

                Author and article information

                S. Karger AG
                October 2002
                08 November 2002
                : 216
                : 5
                : 351-354
                Department of Ophthalmology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
                66180 Ophthalmologica 2002;216:351–354
                © 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                Page count
                Figures: 2, References: 25, Pages: 4
                Original Paper · Travail original · Originalarbeit


                Comment on this article