Long-term outcome after topical ciclosporin in severe dry eye disease with a 10-year follow-up

28Citations
Citations of this article
28Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Aim To report a 10-year follow-up of patients suffering from severe dry eye syndrome (DES) initially treated with topical ciclosporin A (tCSA) for 6months. Methods The charts of 26 patients with severe DES related to keratoconjunctivitis sicca (KCS) and followed for a minimum 10-year follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. All of them were treated initially with tCSA for 6months. The Schirmer I test, fluorescein and lissamine green staining scores and tear film break-up time (TBUT) were recorded to assess clinical symptoms before, during and after treatment. The subjective signs were evaluated with the ocular surface disease index (OSDI) questionnaire. Prolongation and reintroduction of tCSA after the initial treatment and combined treatments were also noted. Results Overall the median (IQR) duration of tCSA treatment was 23 (7-51) months after a prolonged induction treatment lasting 20 (8-41) months during the 10-year follow-up. For symptoms, a statistically significant difference in the OSDI between baseline and the end of the 10-year follow-up was not found (p=0.67). We noted a statistically significant improvement in all clinical signs after the initial treatment period, still present at the end of follow-up. Only 6.5% of the patients needed reintroduction of tCSA after their prolonged induction treatment. Conclusions The improvement observed after an initial tCSA treatment was sustained after a long-term follow-up with few cases requiring additional tCSA treatment. A prolonged induction treatment to decrease initial inflammatory local signs is a promising option in KCS.

Author supplied keywords

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Straub, M., Bron, A. M., Muselier-Mathieu, A., & Creuzot-Garcher, C. (2016). Long-term outcome after topical ciclosporin in severe dry eye disease with a 10-year follow-up. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 100(11), 1547–1550. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-306930

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free