Advertisement

Ophthalmika

  • Martin J. Lohse

Zusammenfassung

Bei den Ophthalmika dominieren seit vielen Jahren die Glaukommittel. Durch Einführung neuer Therapieprinzipien (lokal wirkende Carboanhydrasehem-mer, selektive Alpha2-Agonisten und Prostaglandinderivate) ist die medikamentöse Therapie wesentlich effektiver geworden. Die nächst wichtige Gruppe der Ophthalmika sind die Filmbildner, die bei trockenem Auge angewendet werden. Bemerkenswert zugenommen haben in den letzten zehn Jahren die Verordnungen von Antiphlogistika und von unspezifisch wirkenden Vitaminpräparaten. Dagegen sind die Verordnungen der zweifelhaft wirksamen Antikataraktika kontinuierlich zurückgegangen.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Balfour JA, Wilde MI (1997): Dorzolamide. A review of its pharmacology and therapeutic potential in the management of glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Drugs Aging 19: 384–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Behrens-Baumann W, Begall T (1993): Antiseptics versus antibiotics in the treatment of the experimental conjunctivitis caused by staphylococcus aureus. Ger J Ophthalmol 2: 409–411.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bielory L (2002): Ocular allergy guidelines: a practical treatment algorithm. Drugs. 62:1611–1634.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dechant KL, Goa KL (1991): Levocabastine. A review of its pharmacological properties and therapeutic potential as a topical antihistamine in allergic rhinitis and conjunctivitis. Drugs 41: 202–224.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Emmerich KH (2000): Comparison of latanoprost monotherapy to dorzolamide combined with timolol in patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension. A 3-month randomised study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 238: 19–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Erb C, Horn A, Günthner A, Saal JG, Thiel HJ (1996): Psychosomatische Aspekte bei Patienten mit primärer Keratoconjunctivitis sicca. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 208: 96–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Everett SL, Kowalski RP, Karenchak LM, Landsittel D, Day R, Gordon YL (1995): An in vitro comparison of the susceptibilities of bacterial isolates from patients with conjunctivitis and blepharitis to newer and established topical antibiotics. Cornea 14: 382–387.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fahy GT, Easty DL, Collum LM, Benedict-Smith A, Hillery M, Parsons DG (1992): Randomised double-masked trial of lodoxamide and sodium cromoglycate in allergic eye disease. A multicentre study. Eur J Ophthalmol 1992: 144–149.Google Scholar
  9. Fraunfelder FT, Bagby GC (1983): Ocular chloramphenicol and aplastic anemia. N Engl J Med 308: 1536.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Frezzotti R, Renieri A, Frezzotti P (2004): Adult-onset primary glaucoma and molecular genetics: a review. Eur J Ophthalmol 14:220–225.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Gandolfi SA, Cimino L (2003): Effect of bimatoprost on patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension who are nonresponders to latanoprost. Ophthalmology 110:609–614.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Göbbels M, Gross D (1996): Klinische Studie der Wirksamkeit einer Dexpanthenol-haltigen künstlichen Tränenflüssigkeit (Siccaprotect) bei der Behandlung des trockenen Auges. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 209: 84–88.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goldberg I (2002): Should beta blockers be abandoned as initial monotherapy in chronic open angle glaucoma? The controversy. Br J Ophthalmol 86: 691–692.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Greiner JV, Michaelson C, McWhirter CL, Shams NB (2002): Single dose of ketotifen fumarate.025% vs 2 weeks of cromolyn sodium 4% for allergic conjunctivitis. Adv Ther 19:185–193.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Haas A, Trummer G, Eckhardt M, Schmut O, Uyguner I, Pfeiffer KP (1995): Einfluß von Kalziumdobesilat auf die Progression der diabetischen Retinopathie. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 207: 17–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hammann C, Kammerer R, Gerber M, Spertini F (1996): Comparison of effects of topical levocabastine and nedocromil sodium on the early response in a conjunctival provocation test with allergen. J Allergy Clin Immunol 98: 1045–1050.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hanioglu-Kargi S, Basci N, Soysal H, Bozkurt A, Gursel E, Kayaalp O (1998): The penetration of ofloxacin into human aqueous humor given by various routes. Eur J Ophthalmol 8: 33–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Heijl A, Strahlman E, Sverrisson T, Brinchman-Hansen O, Puustjarvi T, Tipping R (1997): A comparison of dorzolamide and timolol in patients with pseudo-exfoliation and glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Ophthalmology 104:137–142.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Hertel F, Pfeiffer N (1994): Einzeldosisapplikationen in der Glaukomtherapie. Ophthalmologe 91:602–605.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Hingorani M, Lightman S (1995): Therapeutic options in ocular allergic disease. Drugs 50: 208–221.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hwang DG, Schanzlin DJ, Rotberg MH, Foulks G, Raizman MB; Levofloxacin Bacterial Conjunctivitis Place-controlled Study Group (2003): A phase III, placebo controlled clinical trial of 0.5% levofloxacin ophthalmic solution for the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis. Br J Ophthalmol. 87:1004–1009.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ibanez MD, Laso MT, Martinez San Irineo M, Alonso E (1996): Anaphylaxis to diso-dium cromoglycate. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 77:185–186.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Isenberg SJ, Apt L, Valenton M, Del Signore M, Cubillan L, Labrador MA et al (2002): A controlled trial of povidone-iodine to treat infectious conjunctivitis in children. Am J Ophthalmol 134: 681–688.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jackson WB, Low DE, Dattani D, Whitsitt PF, Leeder RG, MacDougall R (2002): Treatment of acute bacterial conjunctivitis: 1% fusidic acid viscous drops vs. 0.3% tobramycin drops. Can J Ophthalmol 37: 228–237.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Jensen HG, Felix C (1998): In vitro antibiotic susceptibilities of ocular isolates in North and South America. In vitro antibiotic testing group. Cornea 17: 79–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Johnstone MA (1997): Hypertrichosis and increased pigmentation of eyelashes and adjacent hair in the region of the ipsilateral eyelids of patients treated with unilateral topical latanoprost. Am J Ophthalmol 124: 544–547.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Kampik A, Meßmer E, Thoma K (1996): Das Auge — Konjunktivitis und Sicca Syndrom. Schriftenreihe der Bayerischen Landesapothekerkammer, Heft 53.Google Scholar
  28. Kass MA, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ, Johnson CA, Keltner JL, Miller JP et al (2002): The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: a randomized trial determines that topical ocular hypotensive medication delays or prevents the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 120: 701–713.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Katz LJ (1999): Brimonidine tartrate 0.2% twice daily vs timolol 0.5% twice daily: 1-year results in glaucoma patients. Brimonidine Study Group. Am J Ophthalmol 127: 20–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kidd M, McKenzie SH, Steven I, Cooper C, Lanz R; Australian Ketotifen Study Group (2003): Efficacy and safety of ketotifen eye drops in the treatment of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. Br J Ophthalmol 87:1206–1211.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lai DS, Lue KH, Hsieh JC, Lin KL, Lee HS (2002): The comparison of the efficacy and safety of cetirizine, oxatomide, ketotifen, and a placebo for the treatment of childhood perennial allergic rhinitis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 89: 589–598.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Maus TL, Larsson LI, McLaren JW, Brubaker RF (1997): Comparison of dorzolamide and acetazolamide as suppressors of aqueous humor flow in humans. Arch Ophthalmol 115:45–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McLeod SD, Kolahdouz-Isfahani A, Rostamian K, Flowers CW, Lee PP, McDonnell PJ (1996): The role of smears, cultures, and antibiotic sensitivity testing in the management of suspected infectious keratitis. Ophthalmology 103: 23–28.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Moroi SE, Lichter PE (2001): Ocular Pharmacology. In: Hardman JG, Limbird LE (eds): Goodman & Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, 10th ed, McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 1821–1848.Google Scholar
  35. Noble S, McTavish D (1995): Levocabastine. An update of its pharmacology, clinical efficacy and tolerability in the topical treatment of allergic rhinitis and conjunctivitis. Drugs 50:1032–1049.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nordlund JR, Pasquale LR, Robin AL et al (1995): The cardiovascular, pulmonary, and ocular hypotensive effects of 0.2% brimonidine. Arch Ophthalmol 113: 77–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. O’Brien TP, Maguire MG, Fink NE, Alfonso E, McDonnell P (1995): Efficacy of ofloxacin vs cefazolin and tobramycin in the therapy for bacterial keratitis. Arch Ophthalmol 113:1257–1265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ooishi M, Miyao M (1997): Antibiotic sensitivity of recent clinical isolates from patients with ocular infections. Ophthalmologica 211,Suppl 1, 15–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ormrod D, McClellan K (2000): Topical dorzolamide 2%/timolol 0.5%: a review of its use in the treatment of open-angle glaucoma. Drugs Aging 17:477–496.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Parrish RK, Palmberg P, Sheu WP and the XLT Study Group (2003): A comparison of latanoprost, bimatoprost, and travoprost in patients with elevated intraocular pressure: a 12-week, randomized, masked-evaluator multicenter study. Am J Ophthalmol 135: 688–703.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Patel SS, Spencer CM (1996): Latanoprost. A review of ist pharmacological properties, clinical efficacy and tolerability in the management of primary open-angle glaucoma. Drugs Aging 9: 363–378.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pfeiffer N (1996): Lokaler Carboanhydrasehemmer Dorzolamid: Entwicklung und Eigenschaften. Ophthalmologe 93:103–118.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Pfeiffer N (1998): Moderne medikamentöse Glaukomtherapie. Dtsch Ärztebl 95: A3292–A3297.Google Scholar
  44. Pinto CG, Lafuma A, Fagnani F, Nuijten MJ, Berdeaux G (2001): Cost effectiveness of emedastine versus levocabastine in the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis in 7 European countries. Pharmacoeconomics 19:255–265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pflugfelder SC (2004): Antiinflammatory therapy for dry eye. Am J Ophthalmol 137: 337–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Quigley HA (1996): Number of people with glaucoma worldwide. Brit J Ophthalmol 80:389–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rietfeld RP, van Weert HCPM, ter Ried G, Bindeis PJF (2003): Diagnostic impact of signs and symptoms in acute infectious conjunctivitis: systematic literature search. Brit med J 327:789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sall K (2000): The efficacy and safety of brinzolamide 1% ophthalmic suspension (Azopt) in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension maintained on timolol therapy. The Brinzolamide Primary Therapy Study Group. Surv Ophthalmol 44(Suppl 2): S155–S162.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schuman JS (1996): Clinical experience with brimonidine 0.2% and timolol 0.5% in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Surv Ophthalmol 41(Suppl) S27–37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Schwab IR, Friedlaender M, McCulley J, Lichtenstein SJ, Moran CT; Levofloxacin Bacterial Conjunctivitis Active Control Study Group (2003): A phase III clinical trial of 0.5% levofloxacin ophthalmic solution versus 0.3% ofloxacin ophthalmic solution for the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis. Ophthalmology. 110: 457–465.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sheikh A, Hurwitz B, Cave J (2004): Antibiotics versus placebo for acute bacterial conjunctivitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000: CD001211 (http://www.update-software.com/abstracts/ab00121.htm).Google Scholar
  52. Shiuey Y, Ambati BK, Adamis AP (2000): A randomized, double-masked trial of topical ketorolac versus artificial tears for treatment of viral conjunctivitis. Ophthalmology 107:1512–1517.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Simmons ST, Samuelson TW (2000): Comparison of brimonidine with latanoprost in the adjunctive treatment of glaucoma. ALPHAGAN/XALATAN Study Group. Clin Ther 22: 388–399.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sorensen SJ, Abel SR (1996): Comparison of the ocular beta-blockers. Ann Pharma-cother 30:43–54.Google Scholar
  55. Stewart WC, Day DG, Stewart JA, Schuhr J, Latham KE (2001): The efficacy and safety of latanoprost 0.005% once daily versus brimonidine 0.2% twice daily in open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Am J Ophthalmol 131: 631–635.Google Scholar
  56. Strahlman E, Tipping R, Vogel R (1995): A double-masked, randomized 1-year study comparing dorzolamide (Trusopt), timolol, and betaxolol. International dorzolamide study group. Arch Ophthalmol 113: 985–986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. The AGIS Investigators (2000): The advanced glaucoma intervention study (AGIS): 7. The relationship between control of intraocular pressure and visual field deterioration. Am J Ophthalmol 130:429–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Walters TR (1996): Development and use of brimonidine in treating acute and chronic elevations of intraocular pressure: a review of safety, efficacy, dose response, and dosing studies. Surv Ophthalmol 41: S19–S26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wand M, Gilbert CM, Liesegang TJ (1999): Latanoprost and herpes simplex keratitis. Am J Ophthalmol 127:602–604.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Watson P, Stjernschantz J, Latanoprost Study Group (1996): A six-month, randomized, double-masked study comparing latanoprost with timolol in open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Ophthalmology 103:126–137.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Watson PG, Barnett MF, Parker V, Haybittle J (2001): A 7 year prospective comparative study of three topical beta blockers in the management of primary open angle glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 85:962–968.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Weinreb RN, Khaw PT (2004): Primary open-angle glaucoma. Lancet 363:1711–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Woodward DF, Gil DW (2004): The inflow and outflow of anti-glaucoma drugs. Trends Pharmacol Sci 25:238–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wright M, Butt Z, McIlwaine G, Fleck B (1997): Comparison of the efficacy of diclofenac and betamethasone following strabismus surgery. Brit J Ophthalmol 81: 299–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin J. Lohse
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Pharmakologie und Toxikologie der Universität WürzburgWürzburg

Personalised recommendations