Oral azithromycin versus doxycycline in meibomian gland dysfunction: a randomised double-masked open-label clinical trial
Background/aims To assess the efficacy and safety of oral azithromycin compared with oral doxycycline in patients with meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) who had failed to respond to prior conservative management. Methods 110 patients (>12 years old) with MGD were randomly assigned to receive eith...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | British journal of ophthalmology 2015-02, Vol.99 (2), p.199-204 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 204 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 199 |
container_title | British journal of ophthalmology |
container_volume | 99 |
creator | Kashkouli, Mohsen Bahmani Fazel, Ali Jalili Kiavash, Victoria Nojomi, Marzieh Ghiasian, Leila |
description | Background/aims To assess the efficacy and safety of oral azithromycin compared with oral doxycycline in patients with meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) who had failed to respond to prior conservative management. Methods 110 patients (>12 years old) with MGD were randomly assigned to receive either oral 5-day azithromycin (500 mg on day 1 and then 250 mg/day) or 1-month doxycycline (200 mg/day). They also continued eyelid warming/cleaning and artificial tears. A score comprising five symptoms and seven signs (primary outcome) was recorded prior to treatment and at 1 week, and 1 and 2 months after treatment. Total score was the sum of both scores at each follow-up. Side effects were recorded and overall clinical improvement was categorised as excellent, good, fair or poor based on the percentage of change in the total score. Results Symptoms and signs improved significantly in both groups (p=0.001). While improvement of symptoms was not different between the groups, bulbar conjunctival redness (p=0.004) and ocular surface staining (p=0.01) were significantly better in the azithromycin group. The azithromycin group showed a significantly better overall clinical response (p=0.01). Mild gastrointestinal side effects were not significantly different between the groups except for the second visit, when the doxycycline group had significantly more side effects (p=0.002). Conclusions Although both oral azithromycin and doxycycline improved the symptoms of MGD, 5-day oral azithromycin is recommended for its better effect on improving the signs, better overall clinical response and shorter duration of treatment. Trial registration number NCT01783860. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305410 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1652402984</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>4012587731</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b420t-df67453f16aed4baedd6a0bf6b40ab16d517a4ee2bb90a8424b594b2a132ca283</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkcFO3DAQhq2qqCxLXwFZ4tJLqMdx7KQ3hChUQuICZ2ucOF0vTry1E9Tw9PVqaYV64mJrZr75Z0Y_IRTYBUApv5pt2G2mDfoh-IIzEEXJKgHsA1mBkHVOqeYjWTHGVAEg4ZicpLTNIZegPpFjXkFZK1mtyHIf0VN8cdMmhmFp3UifbUxzol34vbRL691oac4O1pkwOBzpT49jR7sl9fPYTi6M3yjSmHO5nGyuhNl4WwyYnnIUdnYsPBrr6V7LtXncFB36U3LUo0_28-u_Jo_frx-ubou7-5sfV5d3hRGcTUXXSyWqsgeJthMmP51EZnppBEMDsqtAobCWG9MwrAUXpmqE4Qglb5HX5Zp8OejuYvg12zTpvGZrfb7ChjlpkBUXjDe1yOj5f-g2zHHM22lQqm4kSAWZqg9UG0NK0fZ6F92AcdHA9N4e_dYevbdHH-zJrWevA2Yz2O5f418_MlAeADNs3y_7B687otY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1778961671</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Oral azithromycin versus doxycycline in meibomian gland dysfunction: a randomised double-masked open-label clinical trial</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>BMJ Journals - NESLi2</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Kashkouli, Mohsen Bahmani ; Fazel, Ali Jalili ; Kiavash, Victoria ; Nojomi, Marzieh ; Ghiasian, Leila</creator><creatorcontrib>Kashkouli, Mohsen Bahmani ; Fazel, Ali Jalili ; Kiavash, Victoria ; Nojomi, Marzieh ; Ghiasian, Leila</creatorcontrib><description>Background/aims To assess the efficacy and safety of oral azithromycin compared with oral doxycycline in patients with meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) who had failed to respond to prior conservative management. Methods 110 patients (>12 years old) with MGD were randomly assigned to receive either oral 5-day azithromycin (500 mg on day 1 and then 250 mg/day) or 1-month doxycycline (200 mg/day). They also continued eyelid warming/cleaning and artificial tears. A score comprising five symptoms and seven signs (primary outcome) was recorded prior to treatment and at 1 week, and 1 and 2 months after treatment. Total score was the sum of both scores at each follow-up. Side effects were recorded and overall clinical improvement was categorised as excellent, good, fair or poor based on the percentage of change in the total score. Results Symptoms and signs improved significantly in both groups (p=0.001). While improvement of symptoms was not different between the groups, bulbar conjunctival redness (p=0.004) and ocular surface staining (p=0.01) were significantly better in the azithromycin group. The azithromycin group showed a significantly better overall clinical response (p=0.01). Mild gastrointestinal side effects were not significantly different between the groups except for the second visit, when the doxycycline group had significantly more side effects (p=0.002). Conclusions Although both oral azithromycin and doxycycline improved the symptoms of MGD, 5-day oral azithromycin is recommended for its better effect on improving the signs, better overall clinical response and shorter duration of treatment. Trial registration number NCT01783860.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-1161</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-2079</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305410</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25138765</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BJOPAL</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: BMJ Publishing Group LTD</publisher><subject>Administration, Oral ; Adult ; Anti-Bacterial Agents - adverse effects ; Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use ; Azithromycin - adverse effects ; Azithromycin - therapeutic use ; Chronic illnesses ; Clinical trials ; Double-Blind Method ; Doxycycline - adverse effects ; Doxycycline - therapeutic use ; Eyelid Diseases - diagnosis ; Eyelid Diseases - drug therapy ; Eyelid Diseases - physiopathology ; Female ; Humans ; Lubricant Eye Drops - administration & dosage ; Male ; Meibomian Glands - drug effects ; Meibomian Glands - pathology ; Middle Aged ; Signs ; Studies ; Tears - physiology ; Treatment Outcome ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>British journal of ophthalmology, 2015-02, Vol.99 (2), p.199-204</ispartof><rights>Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions</rights><rights>Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.</rights><rights>Copyright: 2015 Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b420t-df67453f16aed4baedd6a0bf6b40ab16d517a4ee2bb90a8424b594b2a132ca283</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b420t-df67453f16aed4baedd6a0bf6b40ab16d517a4ee2bb90a8424b594b2a132ca283</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttp://bjo.bmj.com/content/99/2/199.full.pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttp://bjo.bmj.com/content/99/2/199.full$$EHTML$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>114,115,314,776,780,3183,23550,27901,27902,77342,77373</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25138765$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kashkouli, Mohsen Bahmani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fazel, Ali Jalili</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kiavash, Victoria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nojomi, Marzieh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghiasian, Leila</creatorcontrib><title>Oral azithromycin versus doxycycline in meibomian gland dysfunction: a randomised double-masked open-label clinical trial</title><title>British journal of ophthalmology</title><addtitle>Br J Ophthalmol</addtitle><description>Background/aims To assess the efficacy and safety of oral azithromycin compared with oral doxycycline in patients with meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) who had failed to respond to prior conservative management. Methods 110 patients (>12 years old) with MGD were randomly assigned to receive either oral 5-day azithromycin (500 mg on day 1 and then 250 mg/day) or 1-month doxycycline (200 mg/day). They also continued eyelid warming/cleaning and artificial tears. A score comprising five symptoms and seven signs (primary outcome) was recorded prior to treatment and at 1 week, and 1 and 2 months after treatment. Total score was the sum of both scores at each follow-up. Side effects were recorded and overall clinical improvement was categorised as excellent, good, fair or poor based on the percentage of change in the total score. Results Symptoms and signs improved significantly in both groups (p=0.001). While improvement of symptoms was not different between the groups, bulbar conjunctival redness (p=0.004) and ocular surface staining (p=0.01) were significantly better in the azithromycin group. The azithromycin group showed a significantly better overall clinical response (p=0.01). Mild gastrointestinal side effects were not significantly different between the groups except for the second visit, when the doxycycline group had significantly more side effects (p=0.002). Conclusions Although both oral azithromycin and doxycycline improved the symptoms of MGD, 5-day oral azithromycin is recommended for its better effect on improving the signs, better overall clinical response and shorter duration of treatment. Trial registration number NCT01783860.</description><subject>Administration, Oral</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - adverse effects</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Azithromycin - adverse effects</subject><subject>Azithromycin - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Chronic illnesses</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Double-Blind Method</subject><subject>Doxycycline - adverse effects</subject><subject>Doxycycline - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Eyelid Diseases - diagnosis</subject><subject>Eyelid Diseases - drug therapy</subject><subject>Eyelid Diseases - physiopathology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Lubricant Eye Drops - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Meibomian Glands - drug effects</subject><subject>Meibomian Glands - pathology</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Signs</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Tears - physiology</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0007-1161</issn><issn>1468-2079</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkcFO3DAQhq2qqCxLXwFZ4tJLqMdx7KQ3hChUQuICZ2ucOF0vTry1E9Tw9PVqaYV64mJrZr75Z0Y_IRTYBUApv5pt2G2mDfoh-IIzEEXJKgHsA1mBkHVOqeYjWTHGVAEg4ZicpLTNIZegPpFjXkFZK1mtyHIf0VN8cdMmhmFp3UifbUxzol34vbRL691oac4O1pkwOBzpT49jR7sl9fPYTi6M3yjSmHO5nGyuhNl4WwyYnnIUdnYsPBrr6V7LtXncFB36U3LUo0_28-u_Jo_frx-ubou7-5sfV5d3hRGcTUXXSyWqsgeJthMmP51EZnppBEMDsqtAobCWG9MwrAUXpmqE4Qglb5HX5Zp8OejuYvg12zTpvGZrfb7ChjlpkBUXjDe1yOj5f-g2zHHM22lQqm4kSAWZqg9UG0NK0fZ6F92AcdHA9N4e_dYevbdHH-zJrWevA2Yz2O5f418_MlAeADNs3y_7B687otY</recordid><startdate>20150201</startdate><enddate>20150201</enddate><creator>Kashkouli, Mohsen Bahmani</creator><creator>Fazel, Ali Jalili</creator><creator>Kiavash, Victoria</creator><creator>Nojomi, Marzieh</creator><creator>Ghiasian, Leila</creator><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150201</creationdate><title>Oral azithromycin versus doxycycline in meibomian gland dysfunction: a randomised double-masked open-label clinical trial</title><author>Kashkouli, Mohsen Bahmani ; Fazel, Ali Jalili ; Kiavash, Victoria ; Nojomi, Marzieh ; Ghiasian, Leila</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b420t-df67453f16aed4baedd6a0bf6b40ab16d517a4ee2bb90a8424b594b2a132ca283</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Administration, Oral</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - adverse effects</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Azithromycin - adverse effects</topic><topic>Azithromycin - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Chronic illnesses</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Double-Blind Method</topic><topic>Doxycycline - adverse effects</topic><topic>Doxycycline - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Eyelid Diseases - diagnosis</topic><topic>Eyelid Diseases - drug therapy</topic><topic>Eyelid Diseases - physiopathology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Lubricant Eye Drops - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Meibomian Glands - drug effects</topic><topic>Meibomian Glands - pathology</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Signs</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Tears - physiology</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kashkouli, Mohsen Bahmani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fazel, Ali Jalili</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kiavash, Victoria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nojomi, Marzieh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghiasian, Leila</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>British journal of ophthalmology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kashkouli, Mohsen Bahmani</au><au>Fazel, Ali Jalili</au><au>Kiavash, Victoria</au><au>Nojomi, Marzieh</au><au>Ghiasian, Leila</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Oral azithromycin versus doxycycline in meibomian gland dysfunction: a randomised double-masked open-label clinical trial</atitle><jtitle>British journal of ophthalmology</jtitle><addtitle>Br J Ophthalmol</addtitle><date>2015-02-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>99</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>199</spage><epage>204</epage><pages>199-204</pages><issn>0007-1161</issn><eissn>1468-2079</eissn><coden>BJOPAL</coden><abstract>Background/aims To assess the efficacy and safety of oral azithromycin compared with oral doxycycline in patients with meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) who had failed to respond to prior conservative management. Methods 110 patients (>12 years old) with MGD were randomly assigned to receive either oral 5-day azithromycin (500 mg on day 1 and then 250 mg/day) or 1-month doxycycline (200 mg/day). They also continued eyelid warming/cleaning and artificial tears. A score comprising five symptoms and seven signs (primary outcome) was recorded prior to treatment and at 1 week, and 1 and 2 months after treatment. Total score was the sum of both scores at each follow-up. Side effects were recorded and overall clinical improvement was categorised as excellent, good, fair or poor based on the percentage of change in the total score. Results Symptoms and signs improved significantly in both groups (p=0.001). While improvement of symptoms was not different between the groups, bulbar conjunctival redness (p=0.004) and ocular surface staining (p=0.01) were significantly better in the azithromycin group. The azithromycin group showed a significantly better overall clinical response (p=0.01). Mild gastrointestinal side effects were not significantly different between the groups except for the second visit, when the doxycycline group had significantly more side effects (p=0.002). Conclusions Although both oral azithromycin and doxycycline improved the symptoms of MGD, 5-day oral azithromycin is recommended for its better effect on improving the signs, better overall clinical response and shorter duration of treatment. Trial registration number NCT01783860.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</pub><pmid>25138765</pmid><doi>10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305410</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0007-1161 |
ispartof | British journal of ophthalmology, 2015-02, Vol.99 (2), p.199-204 |
issn | 0007-1161 1468-2079 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1652402984 |
source | MEDLINE; BMJ Journals - NESLi2; PubMed Central |
subjects | Administration, Oral Adult Anti-Bacterial Agents - adverse effects Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use Azithromycin - adverse effects Azithromycin - therapeutic use Chronic illnesses Clinical trials Double-Blind Method Doxycycline - adverse effects Doxycycline - therapeutic use Eyelid Diseases - diagnosis Eyelid Diseases - drug therapy Eyelid Diseases - physiopathology Female Humans Lubricant Eye Drops - administration & dosage Male Meibomian Glands - drug effects Meibomian Glands - pathology Middle Aged Signs Studies Tears - physiology Treatment Outcome Young Adult |
title | Oral azithromycin versus doxycycline in meibomian gland dysfunction: a randomised double-masked open-label clinical trial |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-11T02%3A48%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Oral%20azithromycin%20versus%20doxycycline%20in%20meibomian%20gland%20dysfunction:%20a%20randomised%20double-masked%20open-label%20clinical%20trial&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20ophthalmology&rft.au=Kashkouli,%20Mohsen%20Bahmani&rft.date=2015-02-01&rft.volume=99&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=199&rft.epage=204&rft.pages=199-204&rft.issn=0007-1161&rft.eissn=1468-2079&rft.coden=BJOPAL&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305410&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E4012587731%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1778961671&rft_id=info:pmid/25138765&rfr_iscdi=true |