Comparison between fish and linseed oils administered orally for the treatment of experimentally induced keratoconjunctivitis sicca in rabbits

Subconjunctival liposomal sirolimus vs. cyclosporine or tacrolimus as treatment of keratoconjunctivitis sicca in dogs: A double-blind, randomized study

PURPOSE

To compare the safety and efficacy of a 100 microgram subconjunctival injection of liposome-encapsulated sirolimus (SCJS) to cyclosporine (CsA) or tacrolimus (CsA/T) for the treatment of keratoconjunctivitis sicca (KCS) in dogs.

METHODS

Dogs with signs and symptoms of KCS were block-randomized to one of two treatment groups: Biweekly SCJS or conventional treatment (CsA/T). Schirmer tear test 1 (STT-1) scores, conjunctival hyperemia (CH) scores, corneal opacity (CO) scores, and clinical evaluation of potential side effects were recorded every 2 weeks for 14 weeks for both groups. Differences between groups were analyzed using the mixed results ANOVA and U-Mann Whitney tests (p < .05 was considered significant).

RESULTS

A total of 30 eyes were included in the study, of which 20 eyes completed follow-up. There was no statistically significant interaction between the treatment group and time on STT-1 score (p = .165), and median CH and CO scores showed no statistically significant differences between groups (p = .353 and p = .393, respectively). There were no clinically significant side effects present in any subject at any time.

CONCLUSION

In this trial, a 1 mg/mL (100 micrograms) SCJS every 2 weeks showed similar safety and efficacy profiles as daily CsA/T in dogs with KS after 14 weeks of treatment. Larger studies should be performed to further assess SCJS as an alternative treatment for KCS.

Determination of intraocular pressure and Schirmer tear test and the comparison between the applanation tonometer (Tono-Pen AVIA®) and the rebound tonometer (TonoVet Plus®) in mini lionhead rabbits

OBJECTIVE

To determine intraocular pressure (IOP) and tear production, as well as to compare the IOP obtained with the TonoVet Plus® (rebound) with the Tono-Pen Avia® (applanation) tonometers.

ANIMALS

Twenty-five Mini Lionhead rabbits (n = 50 eyes).

PROCEDURE

Tear production was measured at 6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. by using the STT. The IOP reading was performed with the rebound tonometer, followed by the applanation tonometer, at 6:00 a.m., 9:00 a.m., 12:00 p.m., 3:00 p.m., and 6:00 p.m. Regression analysis, analysis of variance (anova) and Bland-Altman statistics were used.

RESULTS

Daily tear production was 10.25 ± 3.75 mm/min, with no differences among the moments evaluated. Average daily IOP was 17.7 ± 3.08 mmHg with the TonoVet Plus® and 11.5 ± 4.56 mmHg with the Tono-Pen Avia®. IOP values were higher at the beginning and end of the day with both tonometers.

CONCLUSION

The IOP values are higher with the TonoVet Plus® tonometer. The reference values of IOP and tear production obtained in this work may support the diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring of ocular disorders in pet Mini Lionhead rabbits.

Experimental Models, Induction Protocols, and Measured Parameters in Dry Eye Disease: Focusing on Practical Implications for Experimental Research

Dry eye disease (DED) is one of the major ophthalmological healthcare challenges worldwide. DED is a multifactorial disease characterized by a loss of homeostasis of the tear film, and its main pathogenesis is chronic ocular surface inflammation related with various cellular and molecular signaling cascades. The animal model is a reliable and effective tool for understanding the various pathological mechanisms and molecular cascades in DED. Considerable experimental research has focused on developing new strategies for the prevention and treatment of DED. Several experimental models of DED have been developed, and different animal species such as rats, mice, rabbits, dogs, and primates have been used for these models. Although the basic mechanisms of DED in animals are nearly identical to those in humans, proper knowledge about the induction of animal models is necessary to obtain better and more reliable results. Various experimental models (in vitro and in vivo DED models) were briefly discussed in this review, along with pathologic features, analytical approaches, and common measurements, which will help investigators to use the appropriate cell lines, animal, methods, and evaluation parameters depending on their study design.