2015EyeOpen access

Pupil dilation using drops vs gel: a comparative study

Elad Moisseiev, Dan Loberman, Eran Zunz, Anat Kesler, Anat Loewenstein, Jorje Mandelblum

Open full text 14 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy in pupil dilation and degree of discomfort between topical instillation of mydriatic drops and gel. METHODS: The study included 60 patients with no previous ocular history of trauma and surgery. One eye was dilated with two drops (tropicamide 0.5% and phenylephrine 10%), and the other with one drop of gel (tropicamide 0.5%+phenylephrine 5%). Pupil size was measured by a Colvard pupillometer at baseline and 5, 15, 30, and 45 min following instillation. Pain upon instillation was measured by visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: There was no difference in pupil size at baseline. Use of the gel achieved greater mydriasis than drops (P=0.01), and was also associated with lower pain scores (P=0.003). In diabetic patients, pupil size was smaller at baseline and following instillation of drops and gel. Use of the gel achieved an even greater degree of pupil dilation in this subset of patients than drops (P=0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Gel formulation achieved significantly greater pupil dilation than drops, despite a lower concentration of phenylephrine, and was also associated with significantly lower patient discomfort. This study is the first report of improved mydriatic efficacy in diabetic patients.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy in pupil dilation and degree of discomfort between topical instillation of mydriatic drops and gel. METHODS: The study included 60 patients with no previous ocular history of trauma and surgery. One eye was dilated with two drops (tropicamide 0.5% and phenylephrine 10%), and the other with one drop of gel (tropicamide 0.5%+phenylephrine 5%). Pupil size was measured by a Colvard pupillometer at baseline and 5, 15, 30, and 45 min following instillation. Pain upon instillation was measured by visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: There was no difference in pupil size at baseline. Use of the gel achieved greater mydriasis than drops (P=0.01), and was also associated with lower pain scores (P=0.003). In diabetic patients, pupil size was smaller at baseline and following instillation of drops and gel. Use of the gel achieved an even greater degree of pupil dilation in this subset of patients than drops (P=0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Gel formulation achieved significantly greater pupil dilation than drops, despite a lower concentration of phenylephrine, and was also associated with significantly lower patient discomfort. This study is the first report of improved mydriatic efficacy in diabetic patients.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 14 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy in pupil dilation and degree of discomfort between topical instillation of mydriatic drops and gel. METHODS: The study included 60 patients with no previous ocular history of trauma and surgery. One eye was dilated with two drops (tropicamide 0.5% and phenylephrine 10%), and the other with one drop of gel (tropicamide 0.5%+phenylephrine 5%). Pupil size was measured by a Colvard pupillometer at baseline and 5, 15, 30, and 45 min following instillation. Pain upon instillation was measured by visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: There was no difference in pupil size at baseline. Use of the gel achieved greater mydriasis than drops (P=0.01), and was also associated with lower pain scores (P=0.003). In diabetic patients, pupil size was smaller at baseline and following instillation of drops and gel. Use of the gel achieved an even greater degree of pupil dilation in this subset of patients than drops (P=0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Gel formulation achieved significantly greater pupil dilation than drops, despite a lower concentration of phenylephrine, and was also associated with significantly lower patient discomfort. This study is the first report of improved mydriatic efficacy in diabetic patients.

Key concepts: Tropicamide, Mydriasis, Pupillary response, Pupil, Medicine, Phenylephrine, Eye drop, Ophthalmology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Pupil dilation using drops vs gel: a comparative study — Research Paper | ScholarLens