Biomedical subjects

C Trinquand

Publications and source records attributed to C Trinquand.

24 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

PubMed1993

Comparative study of a collagen corneal shield and a subconjunctival injection at the end of cataract surgery.

To compare the effectiveness of subconjunctival injections and collagen shields in delivering anti-inflammatory agents and antibiotics after cataract surgery, we conducted a prospective study of 61 patients. They were randomly assigned to three groups: subconjunctival injection of gentamicin and dexamethasone; the same route plus a collagen shield without drug; collagen shield soaked in gentamicin and dexamethasone. All subjects had a manual extracapsular cataract extraction with posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation. Eyes were evaluated at the end of surgery and 24 hours later. The collagen shield achieved a progressive effect on pain and a decrease in conjunctival redness after 24 hours. The occurrence of folds in Descemet's membrane was less frequent and aqueous flare less severe than when subconjunctival injections were used. No adverse effect was reported. We conclude that the collagen shield could be a safe, better, noninvasive technique because of its double action of bandage and enhancement of drug penetration.

Aged↗

PubMed1986

Evaluation of doxycycline in the treatment of chlamydial salpingitis.

Acute salpingitis caused by Chlamydia trachomatis and other associated pathogens was diagnosed in 55 patients by means of laparoscopy and serological tests. All patients were treated with intravenous injections of doxycycline (200 mg/day) for four days followed by the same dosage orally for 20 days. Other antibiotics were given concomitantly for the associated infections. Treatment efficacy was evaluated on day 7 and day 30. Clinical symptoms had disappeared in 45 (82%) of the patients, and improvement was seen in another four (11%). Failure to improve in six cases was attributed to concurrent infection with microorganisms other than C trachomatis. After 30 days of treatment, two infections attributed to C trachomatis had not been cured with the doxycycline treatment; one of the patients was believed to have been reinfected and the other did not follow the prescribed treatment. The finding of clinical failure due to associated infection, sometimes discovered after two or three weeks of treatment, necessitates treatment of chlamydial salpingitis with multiple antibiotics, subsequent follow-up procedures (laparoscopic and serological), and appropriate changes in antibiotic therapy after C trachomatis has been eradicated but other pathogens remain.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Topical 0.1% indomethacin solution versus topical 0.1% dexamethasone solution in the prevention of inflammation after cataract surgery. The Study Group.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of topical 0.1% indomethacin with 0.1% dexamethasone after cataract surgery. METHODS: 145 patients (indo = 71, dexa = 74) were enrolled in a randomised, double-masked study and received one drop 4 times a day of indomethacin or dexamethasone for 1 month. RESULTS: Proteinic flare and cellular Tyndall decreased with time in both groups, with a difference in favour of indomethacin for cellular Tyndall on day 30 (p = 0.046). Conjunctival hyperaemia was less pronounced in the dexamethasone group on day 30 (p = 0.03). Tolerance of both drugs was good. CONCLUSION: 0.1% Indomethacin solution appears to be as safe and efficient as 0.1% dexamethasone eyedrops in the management of post-operative inflammation and could be a good alternative to the use of steroids.

Administration, Topical↗

PubMedDate not supplied

A comparison of topical mequitazine and disodium cromoglycate in allergic conjunctivitis induced by a specific conjunctival provocation test.

PURPOSE: Twenty-two people with a history of grass pollen allergic conjunctivitis were enrolled outside the pollen season in this study to compare the efficacy of 0.05% mequitazine eyedrops with topical 2% disodium cromoglycate. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind study compared right and left eyes. Subjects received 2% disodium cromoglycate eyedrops in one eye and mequitazine vehicle in the fellow eye 4 times daily for 4 days. For the last instillation, mequitazine vehicle was replaced by one drop of 0.05% mequitazine and 15 min later a conjunctival provocation test (CPT) with grass pollen was performed. RESULTS: The sum of the scores for hyperemia and itching, and total composite score were lower after 0.05% mequitazine than after 2% disodium cromoglycate (p < 0.0001 in each case). The allergen threshold dose which elicited a positive allergic response was higher in the mequitazine group (p < 0.001). Both treatments showed good tolerance upon instillation. No adverse events related to study treatment occurred. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the superior efficacy of a single drop of 0.05% mequitazine 15 min before CPT compared with 2% disodium cromoglycate 4 times daily for 4 days.

Administration, Topical↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Fixed combination of carteolol and pilocarpine eye-drops: a double-blind randomized cross-over trial versus carteolol alone on intra-ocular pressure. The Study Group.

The effects of carteolol 2% and a fixed combination of carteolol 2% and pilocarpine 2% (CBS 341 A) eye-drops on intraocular pressure (I.O.P.) were compared in a multicenter double-blind, cross-over prospective trial. Twenty-eight patients were initially selected after at least three weeks of carteolol 2%, with a morning I.O.P. greater than 21-mmHg. They received 2 drops a day (b.i.d.), in a random order, alternating two weeks of carteolol 2% alone or two weeks of CBS 341 A. After each two-week period a 12-h I.O.P. curve was plotted. Compared to carteolol the combination reduced I.O.P. on average by around 20% (4 mmHg), with maximum effect 4h after instillation. The effectiveness was confirmed after twelve hours. Some side effects were reported with CBS 341 A, due to the well known pharmacological effects of pilocarpine. The new combination could be useful for second-line therapy in glaucoma.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Comparison of topical 0.05% levocabastine and 0.1% lodoxamide in patients with allergic conjunctivitis. Study Group.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy and safety of 0.05% levocabastine eyedrops (H1 receptor blocker given BID + vehicle BID) compared with 0.1% lodoxamide ophthalmic solution (mast-cell stabilizer instilled QID) in reducing ocular signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis. METHODS: A randomized, double-masked, parallel-group study was conducted in seven centres in France, in which 93 patients suffering from seasonal or perennial allergic conjunctivitis were randomly allocated to either 0.05% levocabastine (n = 47) or 0.1% lodoxamide (n = 46) in both eyes for a 14-day period. Efficacy was evaluated by subjective (prickling, burning, photophobia, itching) and objective (redness, chemosis, eyelid edema, tearing) sign scores at visits on days 7 and 14, and from data noted daily by the patient in a self-evaluation form. Safety was assessed as tolerance upon instillation and adverse event reports. RESULTS: The ocular allergy symptom and sign scores were comparable in the two treatment groups at baseline. With time, statistically and clinically significant reductions (p < 0.001) from baseline were observed for the subjective and objective scores, with no difference between the treatment groups. After the first instillation, signs were alleviated more rapidly in levocabastine-treated patients than in the lodoxamide group (p < 0.001). Overall assessments by the patient and investigator were similar in both groups. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Levocabastine ophthalmic suspension 0.05% (BID) appears to be as effective and safe as lodoxamide 0.1% (QID) in the management of allergic conjunctivitis.

Adolescent↗