Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the effects of nebulized mist and liquid drop applications on retrobulbar blood flow. A prospective, non-randomized clinical trial was used to collect data from 40 healthy human eyes. Color Doppler Imaging determined peak systolic (PSV) and end diastolic (EDV) blood flow velocities and resistance index (RI) in the ophthalmic artery after both applications. Measurements were taken at baseline and at 1 min post-treatment in both eyes with 5 min measurements in the treatment eye only. p values ≤ 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Mist application to treatment eye produced an increase in 1 min and 5 min PSV and EDV (0.001 < p < 0.03) and a decrease in 5 min RI (p = 0.01), with no significant changes in PSV, EDV or RI of control eye or in treatment eye 1 min RI (p > 0.05). Drop application to treatment eye produced an increase in PSV (p < 0.001) and EDV (p = 0.01) at 1 min, with an increase in control eye 1 min PSV and EDV (p = 0.03). There were no statistically significant changes in treatment eye PSV, EDV and RI after 5 min (p > 0.05). The use of nebulized mist may provide an effective alternative to liquid drop medication application.
Highlights
Disease treatment in the field of ophthalmology offers unique forms of drug delivery not seen in other fields of medicine, offering tailored treatment for ocular diseases that attempt to maximize local response while minimizing systemic distribution
A significant increase in peak systolic velocity (PSV) and end-diastolic velocity (EDV), as well as a decrease in resistance index (RI), was found after application of diluted penetration enhancer mist in the treatment eye only when compared to baseline
This hemodynamic response to ocular irritation has been demonstrated previously, showing an increase in retrobulbar flow ranging from 29.6% to 200% in response to saponin liquid drop application in healthy patients [5,6]
Summary
Disease treatment in the field of ophthalmology offers unique forms of drug delivery not seen in other fields of medicine, offering tailored treatment for ocular diseases that attempt to maximize local response while minimizing systemic distribution. Current alternatives to drop preparations include much more invasive methods, such as 1intravitreal injection and sub-Tenon’s infusion Both of these methods carry risks such as 1endophthalmitis and bleeding and are not considered reasonable methods of drug delivery in many 1ocular diseases [1]. In an effort to combat the limited permeability, multiple chemical enhancers have been added to the solutions in order to irritate the ocular surface, enhancing penetration. This irritation can become severe enough to cause significant damage and patient discomfort, often leading to discontinuation of the medication [4,5]. In an attempt to prevent these complications, most current ocular pharmaceuticals have changed formulations to include less effective enhancers, resulting in decreased medication penetration
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
