2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Association of Ultrapure Citicoline, Homotaurine and Vitamin E in the Management of Normotensive Glaucoma: A Case Report

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          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.

          Abstract

          Normal tension glaucoma (NTG) remains a therapeutic challenge for the ophthalmologist since there are no effective therapies as the main therapeutic target, i.e., the intraocular pressure (IOP) increase, is missed. We report on the effectiveness of two neuroprotective molecules (ultrapure citicoline plus homotaurine), in combination with a topical hypotensive approach, in the management of NTG in a long-term follow-up (30 months). A 38-year-old Caucasian woman with no significant medical history and a diagnosis of NTG, after an extensive 30-month treatment with oral dietary supplement containing ultrapure citicoline 500 mg, homotaurine 50 mg and vitamin E once per day and topical glaucoma medication (brimonidine + brinzolamide drops twice per day), presented a significantly improved automated 24-2 visual field with a controlled tonometric measurement associated with a stabilization of retinal fiber layer and ganglion cells at OCT examination with patient satisfaction. This finding suggests that ultrapure citicoline together with homotaurine and vitamin E, through a synergistic neuroprotective effect, could be a promising approach in the management of NTG.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 16

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

          The effectiveness of intraocular pressure reduction in the treatment of normal-tension glaucoma. Collaborative Normal-Tension Glaucoma Study Group.

          In a companion paper, we determined that intraocular pressure is part of the pathogenesis of normal-tension glaucoma by analyzing the effect of a 30% intraocular pressure reduction on the subsequent course of the disease. We report an intent-to-treat analysis of the study data to determine the effectiveness of pressure reduction. One eligible eye of 145 subjects with normal-tension glaucoma was randomized either to no treatment (control) or to a 30% intraocular pressure reduction from baseline. To be eligible for randomization, the normal-tension glaucoma eyes had to show documented progression of field defects or a new disk hemorrhage or had to have field defects that threatened fixation when first presented for the study. Survival analysis compared time to progression of all randomly assigned patients during the course of follow-up from the initial baseline at randomization. In a separate analysis, data of patients developing cataracts were censored at the time that cataract produced 2 lines of Snellen visual acuity loss. Visual field progression occurred at indistinguishable rates in the pressure-lowered (22/66) and the untreated control (31/79) arms of the study (P = .21). In an analysis with data censored when cataract affected visual acuity, visual field progression was significantly more common in the untreated group (21/79) compared with the treated group (8/66). An overall survival analysis showed a survival of 80% in the treated arm and of 60% in the control arm at 3 years, and 80% in the treated arm and 40% in the controls at 5 years. The Kaplan-Meier curves were significantly different (P = .0018). The analyses gave different results because of a higher incidence of cataract in the group that underwent filtration surgery. The favorable effect of intraocular pressure reduction on progression of visual change in normal-tension glaucoma was only found when the impact of cataracts on visual field progression, produced largely by surgery, was removed. Lowering intraocular pressure without producing cataracts is beneficial. Because not all untreated patients progressed, the natural history of normal-tension glaucoma must be considered before embarking on intraocular pressure reduction with therapy apt to exacerbate cataract formation unless normal-tension glaucoma threatens serious visual loss.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Neuroprotection for treatment of glaucoma in adults.

             Dayse F Sena (corresponding) ,  Kristina Lindsley (2017)
            Glaucoma is a heterogeneous group of conditions involving progressive damage to the optic nerve, deterioration of retinal ganglion cells, and ultimately visual field loss. It is a leading cause of blindness worldwide. Open angle glaucoma (OAG), the most common form of glaucoma, is a chronic condition that may or may not present with increased intraocular pressure (IOP). Neuroprotection for glaucoma refers to any intervention intended to prevent optic nerve damage or cell death.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The Low-pressure Glaucoma Treatment Study (LoGTS) study design and baseline characteristics of enrolled patients.

              The Low-Pressure Glaucoma Treatment Study (LoGTS) seeks to evaluate visual field stability in low-pressure glaucoma patients randomized to intraocular pressure reduction in both eyes with topical twice daily brimonidine tartrate 0.2% versus twice daily timolol maleate 0.5%. This article describes the LoGTS design and presents baseline characteristics of the subjects. Randomized, multicenter, double-masked clinical trial. Low-pressure glaucoma patients 30 years of age or older were identified. Exclusion criteria included an untreated pressure of more than 21 mmHg, advanced visual field loss, and contraindications to study medications. Randomization of both eyes to double-masked monotherapy with brimonidine or timolol. Follow-up visits included Humphrey 24-2 full-threshold perimetry, tonometry every 4 months, and annual optic disc photography. Progression of visual field loss. One hundred ninety patients were randomized between 1998 and 2000. Mean age (+/-standard deviation) was 64.9+/-10.7 years. Women comprised 59.5% of the patients. Fifty-three patients (27.9%) had unilateral field loss. The 137 patients with bilateral field loss were older than those with unilateral field loss: 65.7 versus 62.3 years of age (P<0.05). Mean untreated diurnal intraocular pressures were similar between the eyes of the bilateral patients (mean, 15.5 mmHg in both eyes) and unilateral patients (mean, 16.0 mmHg in field loss vs. 15.6 mmHg in fellow eyes). Visual field mean deviation for all eyes was -5.4+/-4.7 decibels. Central corneal thickness in 168 phakic patients was 543 +/- 35 microm (range, 435-655 microm); thickness was less than 500 microm in 15 eyes and was more than 600 microm in 11 eyes. Mean vertical cup-to-disc ratio for all eyes was 0.67+/-0.15. Unilateral field loss patients had a larger cup-to-disc ratio in the field loss eye (0.75+/-0.12) than the fellow eye with a normal field (0.60+/-0.17, P<0.0001). Disc hemorrhage was present at baseline in 29 patients (32 eyes). The LoGTS was successfully able to recruit and enroll patients with open-angle glaucoma and statistically normal intraocular pressure into a longitudinal, prospective clinical trial comparing 2 different glaucoma medications. Baseline characteristics of note were a preponderance of females, unilateral field loss in 27.9% of participants, and frequent optic disc hemorrhage. Central corneal thickness had a normal distribution and did not account for false low-pressure measurements in LoGTS patients.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                COP
                COP
                10.1159/issn.1663-2699
                Case Reports in Ophthalmology
                S. Karger AG
                1663-2699
                2020
                May – August 2020
                16 June 2020
                : 11
                : 2
                : 222-228
                Affiliations
                aInstitute of Ophthalmology, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy
                bCentro Oculistico Diagnostico Chirurgico, Firenze, Italy
                cOphthalmology Unit Department of Neurological, Neuropsychological, Morphological and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
                Author notes
                *Tommaso Verdina, Institute of Ophthalmology, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Via del Pozzo 71, IT–41100 Modena (Italy), tommaso.verdina@gmail.com
                Article
                507881 PMC7383157 Case Rep Ophthalmol 2020;11:222–228
                10.1159/000507881
                PMC7383157
                32774284
                © 2020 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel

                This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC). Usage and distribution for commercial purposes requires written permission. 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: 5, Pages: 7
                Categories
                Case Report

                Comments

                Comment on this article