Comparative evaluation of topical carboxymethyl cellulose either alone or in combination with topical corticosteroid in the treatment of dry eye in a tertiary-care teaching hospital

Saubhagya Sindhu; Shaktibala Dutta; Mirza Atif Beg; Sanjeev Kumar Mittal; Sushobhan Das Gupta

doi:10.5455/njppp.2015.5.1601201519

2022, Vol: 12, Issue: 6

12/6Current Issue Online First Archive Aims and Scope Abstracting & Indexing Most Accessed Articles Most Downloaded Articles Most Cited Articles

Required files to be uploaded

Authorship Declaration

« Previous Article

Original Research

Natl J Physiol Pharm Pharmacol. 2015; 5(3): 207-211

doi: 10.5455/njppp.2015.5.1601201519

Comparative evaluation of topical carboxymethyl cellulose either alone or in combination with topical corticosteroid in the treatment of dry eye in a tertiary-care teaching hospital

Saubhagya Sindhu, Shaktibala Dutta, Mirza Atif Beg, Sanjeev Kumar Mittal, Sushobhan Das Gupta.

Cited by (2)

Abstract
Background: The treatment of dry eyes has traditionally involved hydrating and lubricating the ocular surface, which include usage of artificial tear drops [carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)]. Corticosteroids possess potential anti-inflammatory properties, thereby used in controlling inflammation in many organs. FDA has approved the prescription of topical corticosteroids for corticosteroid-responsive inflammatory conditions such as dry eye diseases.

Aims and Objective: To compare the effect of topical CMC alone or in combination with topical corticosteroid for the treatment of dry eye in a tertiary-care teaching hospital.

Materials and Methods: A total of 60 patients diagnosed with dry eye were enrolled for a study period of 1 year. Patients (n = 60) were stabilized on CMC for 2 weeks and there then divided into two groups: group I (n = 30), CMC; group II (n = 30), CMC + corticosteroid. The patients were followed up for 12 weeks. Diagnostic tests included Schirmers test and tear breakup time (TBUT) test. Quality of life was assessed by Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI). Analysis was done by t test; p <0.05 was considered significant.

Results: Schirmers values in groups I and II at 0 and 12 weeks were 7.8 ± 0.81 and 15.4 ± 0.62 (p < 0.0001) and 7.43 ± 0.42 and 17.53 ± 0.25 (p < 0.0001), respectively. TBUT values in groups I and II at 0 and 12 weeks were 4.93 ± 0.44 and 9.36 ± 0.35 (p < 0.0001) and 4.5 ± 0.38 and 10.43 ± 0.22 (p < 0.0001), respectively. OSDI score in groups I and II at 0 and 12 weeks were 87.64 ± 1.41 and 54.25 ± 1.09 (p < 0.0001) and 91.17 ± 1.13 and 53.55 ± 1.14 (p < 0.0001), respectively. At 12 weeks, intergroup comparison in Schirmers test (p < 0.05), TBUT test (p < 0.05), and OSDI score (p < 0.05) was done. Burning and stinging, photophobia, discharge, ocular infection, and increased intraocular pressure were among the common adverse effects seen.

Conclusion: Both groups showed significant improvement in Schirmers test, TBUT test, and OSDI score at the end of study. Intergroup comparison showed significant improvement in the group where corticosteroid was added. Adding corticosteroid ameliorated the symptoms rapidly but short-term use recommended because of adverse effects.

Key words: Dry Eye, Carboxymethyl Cellulose, Corticosteroid, Schirmers Test, Tear Breakup Time Test, Ocular Surface Disease Index

	ARTICLE TOOLS
	Abstract
	PDF Fulltext
	How to cite this article
	Citation Tools
	Related Records
	Articles by Saubhagya Sindhu Articles by Shaktibala Dutta Articles by Mirza Atif Beg Articles by Sanjeev Kumar Mittal Articles by Sushobhan Das Gupta
	on Google
	on Google Scholar

REFERENCES

1. Djalilian AR, Hamrah P, Pflugfeder SC. Dry eye. In: Krachmer JH, Mannis MJ, Holland EJ (Eds.). Cornea: Fundamentals, Diagnosis & Management, 2nd edn. New York: Elsevier Mosby, 2005. pp. 521-40.

2. Lemp MA, Baudouin C, Baum J, Dogru M, Foulks GN, et al. The definition and classification of dry eye disease: report of the Definition and Classification Subcommittee of the International Dry Eye Work Shop 2007. Ocul Surf. 2007;5:75-92. [DOI via Crossref]

3. Epidemiology Subcommittee of the International Dry Eye Work Shop. The epidemiology of dry eye disease: report of the Epidemiology Subcommittee of the International Dry Eye Work Shop. Ocul Surf. 2007;5:93-107. [DOI via Crossref]

4. Henderer JD, Rapuano JC. Ocular Pharmacology. In: Bruton LL, Chabner BA, Knollmann BC (Eds.). Goodman & GilmanÂs The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, 12th edn. New York: McGraw Hill, 2011. pp. 1773-801.

5. Management and therapy of dry eye disease: report of the Management and Therapy Subcommittee of the International Dry Eye Work Shop 2007. Ocul Surf. 2007;5:163-78. [DOI via Crossref]

6. Miljanovic B, Dana R, Sullivan DA, Schaumberg DA. Impact of dry eye syndrome on vision-related quality of life. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007;143:409-15. [DOI via Crossref] [Pubmed] [PMC Free Fulltext]

7. Miller KL, Walt JG, Mink DR, Satram-Hoang S, Wilson SE, Perry HD, et al. Minimal clinically important difference for the ocular surface disease index. Arch Ophthalmol. 2010;128:94-101. [DOI via Crossref] [Pubmed]

8. Ozcura F, Aydin S, Helvaci MR. Ocular surface disease index for the diagnosis of dry eye syndrome. Ocul Immunol Inflamm. 2007;15:389-93. [DOI via Crossref] [Pubmed]

9. Schein OD, Tielsch JM, MunÃµz B, Bandeen-Roche K, West S. Prevalence of dry eye among the elderly. Am J Opthalmol. 1997;124:723-8. [DOI via Crossref]

10. McCarty CA, Bansal AK, Livingston PM, Stanislavsky YL, Taylor HR. The epidemiology of dry eye in Melbourne, Australia. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:1114-9. [DOI via Crossref]

11. Albietz JM. Prevalence of dry eye subtypes in clinical optometry practice. Optom Vis Sci. 2000;77:357-63. [DOI via Crossref] [Pubmed]

12. Sahai A, Malik P. Dry eye: prevalence and attributable risk factors in a hospital-based population. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2005;53:87-91. [DOI via Crossref] [Pubmed]

13. Lee AJ, Lee J, Saw SM, Gazzard G, Koh D, Widjaja D, Tan DT. Prevalence and risk factors associated with dry eye symptoms: a population based study in Indonesia. Br J Ophthalmol. 2002;86:1347-51. [DOI via Crossref] [Pubmed] [PMC Free Fulltext]

14. Kaercher T, Buchholz P, Kimmich F. Treatment of patients with keratoconjunctivitis sicca with Optive: results of a multicenter, open-label observational study in Germany. Clin Ophthalmol. 2009;3:33-9. [Pubmed] [PMC Free Fulltext]

15. Akingbehin AO. Comparative study of the intraocular pressure effects of fluorometholone 0.1% versus dexamethasone 0.1%. Brit J Ophthalmol. 1983;67:661-3. [DOI via Crossref] [Pubmed] [PMC Free Fulltext]

16. Sindt CW, Foulks GN. Efficacy of artificial tear emulsion in patients with dry eye associated with meibomian gland dysfunction. Clin Ophthalmol. 2013;7:1713-22. [DOI via Crossref] [Pubmed] [PMC Free Fulltext]

17. Yanai K, Huang J, Kadonosono K, Uchio E. Corneal sensitivity after topical bromofenac sodium eye drop instillation. Clin Ophthalmol. 2013;7:741-4. [Pubmed] [PMC Free Fulltext]

18. Pflugfelder SC, Maskin SL, Anderson B, Chodosh J, Holland EJ, De Paiva CS, et al. A randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled, multicenter comparison of loteprednol etabonate ophthalmic suspension, 0.5%, and placebo for treatment of keratoconjunctivitis sicca in patients with delayed tear clearance. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004;138:444-57. [DOI via Crossref] [Pubmed]

19. Bragheeth MA, El-Kasaby MI. Topical corticosteroid drops in the management of dry eye. Egyptian J Hosp Med. 2010;39:181-8.

20. Pflugfelder SC. Prevalence, burden, and pharmacoeconomics of dry eye disease. Am J Manag Care. 2008;14:102-6.

21. Kim TH, Kang JW, Kim KH, Kang KW, Shin MS, Jung SY, et al. Acupuncture for the treatment of dry eye: a multicentre randomised controlled trial with active comparison intervention (artificial teardrops). PLoS One. 2012;7(5):1-9. [DOI via Crossref] [Pubmed] [PMC Free Fulltext]

22. Avunduk AM, Avunduk MC, Varnell ED, Kaufman HE. The comparison of efficacies of topical corticosteroids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drops on dry eye patients: a clinical and immunecytochemical study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003;136(4):593-602. [DOI via Crossref]

23. Yang CQ, Sun W, Gu YS. A clinical study of the efficacy of topical steroids on dry eye. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2006;7(8):675-8. [DOI via Crossref] [Pubmed] [PMC Free Fulltext]

This Article Cited By the following articles

GAP analysis of pharmacy curriculum regarding topical corticosteroid use and safety J Public Health (Berl.) 2021; 29(6): 1291.	1

GAP analysis of pharmacy curriculum regarding topical corticosteroid use and safety J Public Health (Berl.) 2020; (): .	2

How to Cite this Article

Pubmed Style

Saubhagya Sindhu, Shaktibala Dutta, Mirza Atif Beg, Sanjeev Kumar Mittal, Sushobhan Das Gupta. Comparative evaluation of topical carboxymethyl cellulose either alone or in combination with topical corticosteroid in the treatment of dry eye in a tertiary-care teaching hospital. Natl J Physiol Pharm Pharmacol. 2015; 5(3): 207-211. doi:10.5455/njppp.2015.5.1601201519

Web Style

Saubhagya Sindhu, Shaktibala Dutta, Mirza Atif Beg, Sanjeev Kumar Mittal, Sushobhan Das Gupta. Comparative evaluation of topical carboxymethyl cellulose either alone or in combination with topical corticosteroid in the treatment of dry eye in a tertiary-care teaching hospital. https://www.njppp.com/?mno=177694 [Access: June 01, 2022]. doi:10.5455/njppp.2015.5.1601201519

AMA (American Medical Association) Style

Saubhagya Sindhu, Shaktibala Dutta, Mirza Atif Beg, Sanjeev Kumar Mittal, Sushobhan Das Gupta. Comparative evaluation of topical carboxymethyl cellulose either alone or in combination with topical corticosteroid in the treatment of dry eye in a tertiary-care teaching hospital. Natl J Physiol Pharm Pharmacol. 2015; 5(3): 207-211. doi:10.5455/njppp.2015.5.1601201519

Vancouver/ICMJE Style

Saubhagya Sindhu, Shaktibala Dutta, Mirza Atif Beg, Sanjeev Kumar Mittal, Sushobhan Das Gupta. Comparative evaluation of topical carboxymethyl cellulose either alone or in combination with topical corticosteroid in the treatment of dry eye in a tertiary-care teaching hospital. Natl J Physiol Pharm Pharmacol. (2015), [cited June 01, 2022]; 5(3): 207-211. doi:10.5455/njppp.2015.5.1601201519

Harvard Style

Saubhagya Sindhu, Shaktibala Dutta, Mirza Atif Beg, Sanjeev Kumar Mittal, Sushobhan Das Gupta (2015) Comparative evaluation of topical carboxymethyl cellulose either alone or in combination with topical corticosteroid in the treatment of dry eye in a tertiary-care teaching hospital. Natl J Physiol Pharm Pharmacol, 5 (3), 207-211. doi:10.5455/njppp.2015.5.1601201519

Turabian Style

Saubhagya Sindhu, Shaktibala Dutta, Mirza Atif Beg, Sanjeev Kumar Mittal, Sushobhan Das Gupta. 2015. Comparative evaluation of topical carboxymethyl cellulose either alone or in combination with topical corticosteroid in the treatment of dry eye in a tertiary-care teaching hospital. National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 5 (3), 207-211. doi:10.5455/njppp.2015.5.1601201519

Chicago Style

Saubhagya Sindhu, Shaktibala Dutta, Mirza Atif Beg, Sanjeev Kumar Mittal, Sushobhan Das Gupta. "Comparative evaluation of topical carboxymethyl cellulose either alone or in combination with topical corticosteroid in the treatment of dry eye in a tertiary-care teaching hospital." National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and Pharmacology 5 (2015), 207-211. doi:10.5455/njppp.2015.5.1601201519

MLA (The Modern Language Association) Style

Saubhagya Sindhu, Shaktibala Dutta, Mirza Atif Beg, Sanjeev Kumar Mittal, Sushobhan Das Gupta. "Comparative evaluation of topical carboxymethyl cellulose either alone or in combination with topical corticosteroid in the treatment of dry eye in a tertiary-care teaching hospital." National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and Pharmacology 5.3 (2015), 207-211. Print. doi:10.5455/njppp.2015.5.1601201519

APA (American Psychological Association) Style

Saubhagya Sindhu, Shaktibala Dutta, Mirza Atif Beg, Sanjeev Kumar Mittal, Sushobhan Das Gupta (2015) Comparative evaluation of topical carboxymethyl cellulose either alone or in combination with topical corticosteroid in the treatment of dry eye in a tertiary-care teaching hospital. National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 5 (3), 207-211. doi:10.5455/njppp.2015.5.1601201519



Copyright � 2022 National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and Pharmacology All Rights Reserved. Subject to change without notice from or liability to National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and Pharmacology. For best results, please use Internet Explorer or Google Chrome	Contact Information Publisher publishernjppp@gmail.com Editorial query editornjppp1@gmail.com MOB - 8780040272

Contact Information

How to cite this article