在在德国的绿内障病人的 latanoprost 对 timolol 的长期的费用和功效分析
Ulrich, Thelen, Dietmar, Schnober, Sonja Sonja, Schlzel, Michael Michael, Simon Spanggaard Kristoffersen, Lindsay, Andrew J. Nelson, Jeanette, Alan J. Stewart, William William, C. E. Stewart
Abstract
Ulrich, Thelen, Dietmar, Schnober, Sonja Sonja, Schlzel, Michael Michael, Simon Spanggaard Kristoffersen, Lindsay, Andrew J. Nelson, Jeanette, Alan J. Stewart, William William, C. E. Stewart
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate 5-year effectiveness and cos between latanoprost or timolol monotherapy in a pilot trial.METHODS: A retrospective, multi-center trial performed at 6 sites in Germany of patients who had a diagnosis of primary open-angle or pigmentary glaucoma, in at least one eye, initiated on monotherapy with latanoprost or timolol maleate. Qualified consecutive charts were reviewed in which 5-year efficacy, safety and cost data was abstracted.RESULTS: Seventy-seven latanoprost and 49 timolo patients were included, at the final visit no difference existed between the two groups in disc parameters including: rim area, rim area/disc area ratio, cup volume or vertical cup/disc ratio (P >0.05). There was no difference in intraocular pressure (IOP) between the initial latanoprost (17.4 ±2.6) and timolol (16.3 ±2.8mmHg) groups. There was less change in medicines over the follow-up period (0.1 vs 0.8) and fewer medications at the final visit (1.2 vs 1.8) with latanoprost compared to timolol. No patient treated with latanoprost discontinued therapy during follow-up, while 12% discontinued timolol mostly due to inadequate IOP control. Cost/year was less with initial timolol ($458±236) as compared to latanoprost ($552±202). CONCLUSION: Patients begun on latanoprost o timolol and followed over 5 years may have similar clinical outcomes. However, timolol patients may require more medicines and medicine changes to control IOP for long-term, but at a lower cost.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
AIM: To evaluate 5-year effectiveness and cos between latanoprost or timolol monotherapy in a pilot trial.METHODS: A retrospective, multi-center trial performed at 6 sites in Germany of patients who had a diagnosis of primary open-angle or pigmentary glaucoma, in at least one eye, initiated on monotherapy with latanoprost or timolol maleate. Qualified consecutive charts were reviewed in which 5-year efficacy, safety and cost data was abstracted.RESULTS: Seventy-seven latanoprost and 49 timolo patients were included, at the final visit no difference existed between the two groups in disc parameters including: rim area, rim area/disc area ratio, cup volume or vertical cup/disc ratio (P >0.05). There was no difference in intraocular pressure (IOP) between the initial latanoprost (17.4 ±2.6) and timolol (16.3 ±2.8mmHg) groups. There was less change in medicines over the follow-up period (0.1 vs 0.8) and fewer medications at the final visit (1.2 vs 1.8) with latanoprost compared to timolol. No patient treated with latanoprost discontinued therapy during follow-up, while 12% discontinued timolol mostly due to inadequate IOP control. Cost/year was less with initial timolol ($458±236) as compared to latanoprost ($552±202). CONCLUSION: Patients begun on latanoprost o timolol and followed over 5 years may have similar clinical outcomes. However, timolol patients may require more medicines and medicine changes to control IOP for long-term, but at a lower cost.
Key concepts: Latanoprost, Timolol, Medicine, Intraocular pressure, Glaucoma, Ophthalmology, Anesthesia