Purchase this article with an account.
A. Avakian, P. H. Menezes, D. L. Peixoto, W. T. Hida, G. M. S. Andrade, A. Avakian; Comparison of Ocular Side Effects Between 0.3% Gatifloxacin and 0.5% Moxifloxacin. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2008;49(13):1990.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
To analyze and compare pupil size, conjunctival hyperemia, ocular irritation and pain in individuals undergoing cataract preoperative prophylactic therapy with 0.3% Gatifloxacin and 0.5% moxifloxacin ophthalmic solution.
This prospective randomized comparative study included 60 eyes of 60 patients undergoing cataract preoperative prophylactic therapy . Patients scheduled for routine phacoemulsification were given, in a double masked fashion, either moxifloxacin 0.5% (VigamoxTM) (n=30) or gatifloxacin 0.3% (ZymarTM) (n=30) one drop every 15 minute (5 times) before the surgical procedure. Ocular side effects (pupil size, conjunctival hyperemia, ocular irritation, and pain) was scored according to a numerical scale of 1 to 5 in both groups. Pupil size was measured by a pupilometer and conjunctival hyperemia was scored by one clinician only. Ocular irritation and pain was scored by the patient. Five minutes after the last application, patients were submitted to slit lamp examination under standard room and luminance condition and graded according to numerical scale. Statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance (ANOVA).
Pupil size in moxifloxacin group was significantly smaller when compared to gatifloxacin group (p<0,05). Conjunctival hyperemia scored by the clinician did not show any statistical difference. Ocular irritation and pain scored by the patient also did not show any statistical difference.
There are no difference in side effects (conjunctival hyperemia, ocular irritation and pain) in individuals undergoing cataract preoperative prophylactic therapy with 0.3% gatifloxacin and 0.5% moxifloxacin ophthalmic solution. However, the effect of 0.3% gatifloxacin in the pupil size can have a benefic influence in the surgical outcome.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only