Brimonidine purite 0.15% versus dorzolamide 2% each given twice daily to induce intraocular pressure in subjects with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension

21Citations
Citations of this article
23Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background/aims: To evaluate the efficacy of brimonidine purite versus dorzolamide given twice daily in primary open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertensive subjects. Methods: In this double masked, multicentre, prospective, crossover comparison 33 subjects were randomised to brimonidine purite or dorzolamide for the first 4 week treatment period after a 4 week washout. Subjects began the opposite treatment for the second 4 week period after another 4 week washout. Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured at 08:00 (trough) and 10:00, 18:00, and 20:00 hours after dosing at each baseline and at the end of each treatment period. Results: The baseline diurnal IOP was 22.9 (SD 2.8) for brimonidine purite and 22.2 (SD 2.4) mm Hg for dorzolamide. The trough IOP following 4 weeks of therapy was 21.0 (SD 3.7) for brimonidine purite and 21.0 (SD 3.1) mm Hg for dorzolamide (p = 0.90). The mean diurnal IOP was 19.3 (SD 3.1) for brimonidine purite and 19.8 (SD 2.4) mm Hg for dorzolamide (p = 0.46). Dorzolamide caused more ocular stinging upon instillation (n = 8) than brimonidine purite (n = 1) (p = 0.02). No statistical differences existed between groups for systemic adverse events. Conclusions: This study suggests that brimonidine purite and dorzolamide each given twice daily have similar efficacy in primary open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertensive subjects. However, a trend was observed at 10:00 of greater brimonidine purite efficacy compared with dorzolamide.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sharpe, E. D., Day, D. G., Beischel, C. J., Rhodes, J. S., Stewart, J. A., & Stewart, W. C. (2004). Brimonidine purite 0.15% versus dorzolamide 2% each given twice daily to induce intraocular pressure in subjects with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 88(7), 953–956. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2003.032979

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