The efficacy of bromfenac ophthalmic solution 0.07% dosed once daily in achieving zero-to-trace anterior chamber cell severity following cataract surgery

Assessment of the eye surface and subjective symptoms after using 0.1% dexamethasone drops with and without preservatives in patients after cataract surgery

Cataract surgery can cause dry eye symptoms. One of the many factors compromising the ocular surface is the use of benzalkonium chloride (BAC)-preserved topical eye drops administered during the postoperative period. In this open-label, prospective, randomized, comparative clinical trial, 40 patients not previously affected by dry eye disease were assigned to receive either preservative-free (PFD) or preserved (PD) dexamethasone 0.1% eye drops for two weeks after a standard phacoemulsification procedure. Fluorescein break-up time, ocular surface staining score, Schirmer test, Ocular Surface Disease Index and anterior chamber (AC) cells were evaluated at baseline prior to the surgery and 2 weeks after surgery. No statistically significant differences in baseline assessments were observed between groups. At week 2, a significant increase in corneal staining scores (p = 0.003) and foreign body sensation (p = 0.04) was observed for the PD group only. The conjunctival staining score was significantly higher in both groups. The mean AC cell grading was higher in the PFD group than in the PD group (0.28 ± 0.30 and 0.07 ± 0.18, respectively; p = 0.013). Preservative-free dexamethasone eye drops after cataract surgery caused milder dry eye symptoms as compared with preserved dexamethasone. The AC inflammation control comparison may require a larger study group. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT05753787, 03/03/2023.

Effect of Anterior Chamber Instability during Phacoemulsification Combined with Intraocular Lens Implantation

Purpose

To determine the incidence of anterior chamber (AC) instability during phacoemulsification (phaco) combined with intraocular lens implantation and investigate its effect on intraocular tissues.

Methods

Among the 248 enrolled eyes, 121 and 127 eyes were categorized into the irrigation and nonirrigation groups, respectively, depending on the use of a self-made anterior chamber maintainer (ACM) during phaco. AC stability was evaluated using operating microscopy and intraoperative optical coherence tomography (iOCT). Slit-lamp examination of AC flare and cells was performed 1 day postoperatively. Corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), endothelial cell density (ECD), central corneal thickness (CCT), posterior vitreous detachment (PVD), and central foveal thickness (CFT) were evaluated preoperatively and at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months postoperatively.

Results

There was good consistency in AC stability evaluation between operating microscopy and iOCT. The incidence of AC instability was significantly different between groups after the phaco and irrigation/aspiration tips were withdrawn from the AC (P < 0.001). At 1 day postoperatively, after excluding eyes in which the AC could not be visualized, AC cell grades were significantly lower in the irrigation group (P = 0.014). There was no significant difference in CDVA, IOP, ECD, and CCT between groups during the 3-month follow-up (P > 0.05). At 1 month and 3 months postoperatively, PVD occurred in 8 (16.3%) and 14 (28.6%) eyes and in 22 (40.7%) and 37 (68.5%) eyes in the irrigation and nonirrigation groups, respectively (P = 0.006 and P < 0.001). CFT was significantly higher in the nonirrigation group at 1 and 3 months postoperatively (P = 0.018 and P = 0.010).

Conclusions

Both operating microscopy and iOCT are efficient for AC stability evaluation. When the phaco and I/A tips were withdrawn from the AC, there was frequent instability. Intraoperative AC instability can increase surgery-induced inflammation and lead to postoperative complications such as PVD, retinal detachment, and macular edema. The self-made ACM can effectively reduce the incidence of intraoperative AC instability and these complications.

Bromfenac Ophthalmic Solution 0.07% Versus Nepafenac Ophthalmic Suspension 0.3% for Post-Cataract Surgery Inflammation: A Pilot Study of Identical Dosing Regimens with Pre-Surgical "Pulse" Dose

Introduction

This small pilot study is the first direct comparison of the currently marketed formulations of bromfenac (0.07% solution) and nepafenac (0.3% suspension) using identical dosing regimens and including an extra pre-surgical “pulse” dose in patients undergoing cataract surgery.

Methods

Adults scheduled for unilateral phacoemulsification with intraocular lens implantation were randomly assigned to bromfenac 0.07% or nepafenac 0.3%, each given once-daily 1 day prior to surgery, on the day of surgery plus an extra dose 1 h before surgery, and for 14 days after surgery. Assessments included summed ocular inflammation score (SOIS), visual acuity (VA), and retinal thickness measured via optical coherence tomography.

Results

The study population included 49 patients (bromfenac, n = 24; nepafenac, n = 25). The percentage of patients with a SOIS = 0 (no cells or flare) at post-surgical day 15 (primary efficacy endpoint) was statistically similar between the bromfenac (57.1%) and nepafenac (50.0%) treatment groups (intent-to-treat with last observation carried forward) (P = 0.6318). The proportions of patients with an SOIS of 0 at days 3 and 8 were significantly (P < 0.05) higher in the bromfenac group (23.8 and 52.4%, respectively) versus the nepafenac group (0.0 and 20.8%, respectively). Visual acuity was similar between groups at each study visit, as were mean retinal thickness and change from baseline in retinal thickness. Rescue medication (typically difluprednate) was given on or before day 15 to 13 patients in each treatment group (bromfenac, 54.2%; nepafenac, 52.0%). There were no adverse events considered to be related to either treatment.

Conclusions

The results of this small pilot study suggest that once-daily bromfenac 0.07% produces similar benefits with regard to postsurgical inflammation, VA, and retinal thickness as once-daily nepafenac 0.3%, and possibly has a faster onset of anti-inflammatory action, when compared using identical dosing regimens.

Funding

Bausch & Lomb Incorporated.

Trial Registration

NCT03886779.

Comparison of 2 regimens of loteprednol etabonate and bromfenac for cataract surgery

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of 2 dosing regimens of loteprednol etabonate (LE) ophthalmic gel 0.5% and bromfenac ophthalmic solution 0.07% in patients undergoing routine cataract surgery.

DESIGN

Six-week prospective, masked, randomized controlled noninferiority study.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred eyes.

METHODS

Patients undergoing uncomplicated cataract surgery were selected in a consecutive manner. Patients were randomized to one of 2 groups: LE QID + qD bromfenac (control group) versus LE BID + qD bromfenac (study group). Primary outcome metrics included summed ocular inflammation score (SOIS) and adverse events. Secondary outcome measures included intraocular pressure, visual acuity, central retinal thickness, and subjective symptomology scores measured at 4 study visits. The final visit included a questionnaire addressing compliance, satisfaction, and comfort with the medications.

RESULTS

Both groups demonstrated similar effectiveness and safety between dosing regimens. No statistically significant difference was reported between groups regarding SOIS (visit 1 p = N/A, visit 2 p = 0.66, visit 3 p = 0.60, visit 4 p = 0.08). No adverse events were reported relating to the difference in study regimen. A statistically significant difference was not found regarding secondary outcomes (p > 0.05). Control group patients reported a more difficult time remembering their doses for bromfenac but not LE (bromfenac p < 0.05; LE p = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that both groups had similar outcomes with respect to control of ocular inflammation with no differences in adverse outcomes. The compliance questionnaire also suggests a patient preference for the dosing regimen with lower frequency of drop application.

Comparative study of the efficacy and safety of bromfenac, nepafenac and diclofenac sodium for the prevention of cystoid macular edema after phacoemulsification

AIM

To compare the efficacy, tolerability and safety of bromfenac 0.09%, nepafenac 0.1% or diclofenac 0.1% for the prophylaxis of the cystoid macular edema (CME) after phacoemulsification.

METHODS

Group sequential observational comparative study. After phacoemulsification, patients received two months for topical treatment of either diclofenac sodium, bromfenac or nepafenac. All patients received concomitant topical tobramycin 0.3% and topical prednisolone 1%. We measured CME using optical coherence tomography (OCT) central foveal thickness, macular thickness and total macular volume.

RESULTS

We enrolled 243 patients from January to June 2015, and 35% received diclofenac, 32.9% bromfenac and 32.1% nepafenac. When we compared pre-operative to three weeks to two months, bromfenac was more effective in reducing foveal volume (21.3 and 35.4 mm³, respectively), compared with the diclofenac (1.3 and 11.5 mm³, respectively), and the nepafenac group, became more edematous 6.4 and 5.3, respectively. Totally 133 patients completed the post-surgical satisfaction questionnaire. Patients complained of eye stickiness in 13.8% whom we gave nepafenac, versus 10.3% whom we gave diclofenac sodium, and in 0 whom we gave bromfenac.

CONCLUSION

Bromfenac is the best tolerated and is more effective than diclofenac and nepafenac in reducing CME after phacoemulsification.

Bromfenac 0.09% bioavailability in aqueous humor, prophylactic effect on cystoid macular edema, and clinical signs of ocular inflammation after phacoemulsification in a Mexican population

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the aqueous humor bioavailability and clinical efficacy of bromfenac 0.09% vs nepafenac on the presence of cystoid macular edema (CME) after phacoemulsification.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A Phase II, double-blind, masked, active-controlled, multicenter, clinical trial of 139 subjects, randomized to either a bromfenac 0.09% ophthalmic solution (n=69) or nepafenac 0.1% (n=70). Subjects instilled a drop three times a day for a period of 30 days. Follow-up visits were on days 2, 7, 15, 30, and 60. Biomicroscopy, clinical ocular signs, and assessment of posterior segment were performed. The primary efficacy endpoints included the presence of CME evaluated by optical coherence tomography. Safety evaluation included intraocular pressure, transaminase enzymes, lissamine green, and fluorescein stain.

RESULTS

The demographic and efficacy variables were similar between groups at baseline. The presence of pain, photophobia, conjunctival hyperemia, chemosis, cellularity, and corneal edema disappeared by day 30 in both groups. The central retinal thickness did not show significant changes after treatment when compared to baseline as follows: in the bromfenac group (247.2±32.9 vs 252.0±24.9 μm; P=0.958) and in nepafenac group (250.8±34 vs 264.0±34.1 μm; P=0.137), respectively. A statistically significant difference was observed between bromfenac and nepafenac group: (252.0±24.9 vs 264.0±34.1 μm; P=0.022), at day 30, respectively; even though there was no clinical relevance in the presentation of CME. There were no significant alterations in intraocular pressure, either lissamine green or fluorescein stains. The adverse events were not related to the interventions.

CONCLUSION

Bromfenac 0.09% ophthalmic solution showed similar clinical efficacy to reduce the presentation of CME after phacoemulsification compared to nepafenac 0.01%.

Bromfenac Ophthalmic Solution 0.07%: A Review of Its Use After Cataract Surgery

The nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug bromfenac has recently been reformulated with a lower pH to facilitate a reduction in the concentration of bromfenac (to 0.07%) while ensuring an ocular bioavailability similar to that of the 0.09% formulation. Bromfenac ophthalmic solution 0.07% (hereafter referred to as bromfenac 0.07%) [Prolensa(®)] is a once-daily topical ophthalmic solution available in the USA and Canada for the treatment of postoperative inflammation and the reduction of ocular pain in patients who have undergone cataract surgery. In an integrated analysis of two multicentre, phase III studies, bromfenac 0.07% was significantly more effective than placebo in reducing ocular inflammation and pain. In these studies, bromfenac 0.07% was well tolerated, with significantly lower incidences of adverse events, and adverse events affecting the study eye than with placebo. The most common adverse events in the study eye (eye pain, anterior chamber inflammation, foreign body sensation, photophobia, conjunctival hyperaemia and corneal oedema) occurred in numerically fewer bromfenac 0.07% than placebo recipients. Thus, current evidence suggests once-daily bromfenac 0.07% extends the treatment options currently available for the management of postoperative inflammation and pain following cataract surgery.