The Intraocular Pressure Reduction Efficacy Of The Fixed Combination Of0.005%Latanoprost And0.5%Timolol Maleate:A System Review

ObjectivesTo assess and compare the effectiveness of FCLT versus beta-blockers for POAG or OHT to control intraocular pressure.Methods We searched PUBMED, EMBASE, The cochrane library and SCI for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cross-over trials on the comparation between FCLT and beta-blockers. The results of meta-analysis were expressed with MD (mean difference) and95%CL.Result8published trials with1808participants were included. Compared with beta-blockers, FCLT resulted in lower mean diurnal IOP (MD-2.95[-3.34,-2.56], P<0.00001) and24-h IOP (MD-2.84[-3.57,-2.12], P<0.00001),also lower diurnal IOP fluctuation (MD-0.85[-1.18,-0.53],P<0.00001)ConclusionsAvailable evidence shows that FCLT has better diurnal IOP control efficient when compared with beta-blockers. However, more high quality RCTs are needed to interpret the efficient of24-h intraocular pressure. ObjectivesTo assess and compare the effectiveness of FCLT versus prostaglandin analogues (PGAs) for POAG or OHT to control intraocular pressure.MethodsWe searched PUBMED, EMBASE, The cochrane library and SCI for randomized controlled trials(RCTs) and cross-over trials on the comparation between FCLT and PGAs.The results of meta-analysis were expressed with MD(mean difference)and95%CL.Result12published trials with2534participants were included. Compared with latanoprost, FCLT resulted in lower mean diurnal IOP (MD-1.13[-1.47,-0.79], P<0.00001) and24-h IOP (MD-2.50[-3.58,-1.42], P<0.00001),also lower diurnal IOP fluctuation (MD-0.65[-1.02,-0.27],P=0.0007). There is no significant difference between FCLT and travoprost for mean diurnal IOP (MD0.05[-0.19,0.29], P=0.68). The difference of24-h mean IOP between FCLT and bimatoprost is not significant too (MD0.20[-0.44,0.85], P=0.53)ConclusionsAvailable evidence shows that FCLT has better diurnal IOP control efficient when compared with latanoprost, and same IOP control efficient compared with travoprost and bimatoprost. However, more high quality RCTs are needed to interpret the efficient of24-h intraocular pressure. ObjectivesTo assess and compare the effectiveness of FCLT versus concomitant use of timolol and latanoprost for POAG or OHT to control intraocular pressure.MethodsWe searched PUBMED, EMBASE, The cochrane library and SCI for randomized controlled trials(RCTs) and cross-over trials on the comparation between FCLT and concomitant use of timolol and latanoprost.The results of meta-analysis were expressed with MD (mean difference) and95%CL.Result3published trials with961participants were included. Compared with concomitant use of timolol and latanoprost, FCLT resulted in higher mean diurnal IOP (MD1.10[0.81,1.39], P<0.00001) when FCLT used in the morning and same mean diurnal IOP (MD0.42[-0.06,0.89], P=0.09) when FCLT used in the evening.Conclusions Available evidence shows that compared with concomitant use of timolol and latanoprost, FCLT has worse diurnal IOP control efficient when FCLT used in the morning, and same IOP control efficient when FCLT used in the evening. However, more high quality RCTs are needed to interpret the efficient of24-h intraocular pressure. ObjectivesTo assess and compare the effectiveness of FCLT versus the fixed combination of other prostaglandin analogues (PGAs) and timolol for POAG or OHT to control intraocular pressure.MethodsWe searched PUBMED, EMBASE, The cochrane library and SCI for randomized controlled trials(RCTs) and cross-over trials on the comparation between FCLT and the fixed combination of other prostaglandin analogues (PGAs) and timolol.The results of meta-analysis were expressed with MD (mean difference) and95%CL.Result5published trials with720participants were included. Compared with FCTT(), FCLT resulted in lower mean diurnal IOP (MD-1.84[-3.34,-0.34], P=0.02) when both used in the evening. Compared with FCBiT, FCLT resulted in higher mean diurnal IOP (MD0.78[0.50,1.06], P<0.00001) and higher IOP fluctuation (MD1.10[0.45,1.75],P=0.0009).ConclusionsAvailable evidence shows that FCLT has better diurnal IOP control efficient when compared with FCTT. But worse IOP control efficient when compared with FCBiT. However, more high quality RCTs are needed to interpret the efficient of24-h intraocular pressure. ObjectivesTo assess and compare the effectiveness of FCLT versus other fixed combinations for POAG or OHT to control intraocular pressure.MethodsWe searched PUBMED, EMBASE, The cochrane library and SCI for randomized controled trials (RCTs) and cross-over trials on the comparation between FCLT and other fixed combinations. The results of meta-analysis were expressed with MD (mean difference) and95%CL.Result9published trials with732participants were included. Compared with FCDT(the fixed combination of2%dorzolamide and0.5%timolol), FCLT resulted in lower mean diurnal IOP (MD-0.59[-0.91,-0.26] P=0.0004) and same diurnal IOP fluctuation (MD-0.25[-0.98,0.47] P=0.49). There is no significant difference between FCLT and FCBT (the fixed combination of0.2%brimonidine and0.5%timolol)for mean diurnal IOP (MD-0.50[-2.07,1.07] P=0.53)ConclusionsAvailable evidence shows that FCLT has better mean diurnal IOP control efficient and same IOP fluctuation control efficient when compared with FCDT. FCLT has same IOP control efficient compared with FCBT. However,more high quality RCTs are needed to interpret the efficient of24-h intraocular pressure.