A retrospective analysis of the postoperative use of loteprednol etabonate gel 0.5% following laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis or photorefractive keratectomy surgery

Efficacy and safety of loteprednol etabonate versus fluorometholone in the treatment of patients after corneal refractive surgery: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To perform a systematic evaluation of the efficacy and safety of loteprednol etabonate (LE) 0.5% versus fluorometholone (FML) 0.1% for treating patients after corneal refractive surgery with the aim of providing an evidence-based rationale for clinical drug selection.

METHODS

Electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, WanFang, and CNKI) were searched (from inception to December 2021) for comparative clinical studies that evaluated LE versus FML treatment for post-corneal refractive surgery patients. Meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.3 software. The pooled risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

Nine studies with a total sample size of 2677 eyes were included in this analysis. FML 0.1% and LE 0.5% produced a similar incidence of corneal haze within 6 months after surgery (P = 0.13 at 1 month, P = 0.66 at 3 months, and P = 0.12 at 6 months). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of the mean logMAR postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (WMD: - 0.00; 95% CI: - 0.01 to 0.00; P = 0.29) and spherical equivalent (WMD: 0.01; 95% CI: - 0.01 to 0.03; P = 0.35). LE 0.5% appears to have a higher tendency to reduce the incidence of ocular hypertension compared FML 0.1%, but there was no statistical significance (RR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.27 to 1.50; P = 0.30).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated that LE 0.5% and FML 0.1% had comparable efficacy in preventing corneal haze and corticosteroid-induced ocular hypertension, with no difference in visual acuity in patients after corneal refractive surgery.

Real world use of loteprednol etabonate ophthalmic gel 0.5% in cases representative of comorbid pathologies responding to minimally invasive glaucoma surgery

Purpose

With the increasing use of minimally invasive surgical techniques for intraocular pressure (IOP) lowering in glaucoma patients, there is a need to examine best practices regarding the postoperative management of these patients. Corticosteroids, though effective in controlling postoperative ocular pain and inflammation, present distinct challenges in glaucoma surgery patients, as their use can be associated with IOP elevation. Loteprednol etabonate (LE) is an ocular corticosteroid designed to have an improved safety profile relative to other corticosteroids.

Methods

We report here a representative selection of cases in which patients were successfully treated with LE ophthalmic gel 0.5% (LE gel) following a variety of minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) procedures. Cases included patients undergoing various procedures including a Trabectome combined with cataract surgery; micro-stent surgery (iStent) combined with cataract surgery; supraciliary CyPass Micro-Stent placement combined with cataract surgery; Kahook Dual Blade goniotomy; and ab interno canaloplasty using the iTrack catheter.

Observations

In all cases, use of LE gel during the postoperative period appeared effective and safe in reducing inflammation and controlling pain. No adverse events or IOP elevations were noted, even in those patients continuing use of LE gel past the postoperative period for longer than six months with documented follow-up. In two cases, patients with elevated IOP using either prednisolone or difluprednate postoperatively were switched to LE gel, with a subsequent reduction in IOP.

Conclusions

This selection of cases involving patients undergoing MIGS suggests that LE gel may be an effective and safe option for treating postoperative inflammation and pain following such procedures with minimal to no effect on IOP or other negative sequalae.

Comparison of bandage contact lens removal on the fourth versus seventh postoperative day after photorefractive keratectomy: A randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

To compare the outcomes of bandage contact lens (BCL) removal on the fourth versus seventh post-operative day following photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).

METHODS

This study recruited eyes of patients who underwent PRK surgery. The patients were randomly assigned to 2 groups. In Group 1 BCL was removed on the 4th postoperative day, while in Group 2, BCL was removed on the 7th postoperative day. After BCL removal, patients were asked to express their pain score and eye discomfort. At one and three months follow-up examinations, visual acuity scale was assessed. Slit-lamp examination was performed in all visits to evaluate complications.

RESULTS

260 eyes of 130 patients underwent PRK. The age and sex ratio were not significantly different between the two groups. One month after the surgery, the logMAR uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) were significantly lower in Group 2 (P value = 0.016, 0.001 respectively), however, the UDVA and CDVA were not significantly different after 3 months (P > 0.05). In Group 1, filamentary keratitis (FK) was observed in 10 (7.6%) eyes, 6 (4.61%) eyes were diagnosed with recurrent corneal erosion (RCE) and corneal haze was detected in 3 (2.3%) eyes. However, in Group 2, RCE was observed in 4 (2.3%) and FK was noted in 4 (3.07%) eyes. No haze was seen in Group 2. The difference in rate of complications was statistically significant (14.6% and 6.1% in Groups 1 and 2, respectively, P = 0.02). Pain and eye discomfort scores were not significantly different (P > 0.05). There was no major complications including infectious keratitis in either groups.

CONCLUSION

Following PRK surgery, BCL removal on the seventh postoperative day yields faster visual rehabilitation and lower rate of postoperative complications with no increase in eye pain, discomfort or infection.

Impact of the Topical Ophthalmic Corticosteroid Loteprednol Etabonate on Intraocular Pressure

Corticosteroids are a mainstay therapeutic option for the treatment of ocular inflammation. However, safety remains a concern for clinicians, particularly with long-term use. Though highly effective at suppressing inflammatory and allergic responses, topical ophthalmic corticosteroids carry an inherent risk of side effects, including elevated intraocular pressure (IOP), a risk factor for the development of glaucoma. The corticosteroid loteprednol etabonate (LE) contains an ester rather than a ketone at the C-20 position, minimizing the potential for side effects, including IOP elevation. In early pivotal clinical trials of LE ophthalmic suspension for conjunctivitis (allergic, giant papillary), anterior uveitis, and post-operative inflammation, LE had minimal impact on IOP over short-term (<28 days) and long-term (≥28 days) use. Since then, new LE formulations—including a gel, an ointment, and a suspension of LE in combination with tobramycin—have become commercially available. Multiple studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of LE for inflammatory conditions have been reported, including those requiring longer-term treatment such as photorefractive keratectomy, corneal transplantation, and dry eye disease. We review the available published data on the effect of LE on IOP and report on the cumulative incidence of clinically significant IOP elevations (≥10 mm Hg from baseline) with short-term and long-term LE use. In all studies, LE consistently demonstrated a low propensity to elevate IOP, regardless of formulation, dosage regimen, or treatment duration, including in known steroid responders. The cumulative proportion of patients exhibiting clinically significant IOP increases was 0.8% (14/1725 subjects) in studies evaluating short-term LE treatment and 1.5% (21/1386 subjects) in long-term studies. Furthermore, use of LE was associated with significantly lower rates of IOP elevation ≥10 mm Hg as compared to prednisolone acetate or dexamethasone (when used in combination with tobramycin). The cumulative data to date substantiates a favorable IOP-safety profile for LE with both short-term and long-term use.