Skip to main content
Log in

Topical Lomefloxacin versus Topical Chloramphenicol in the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Conjunctivitis

  • Clinical Use
  • Published:
Clinical Drug Investigation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

We performed a prospective, randomised, investigator-masked and parallel-group study to compare topical lomefloxacin 0.3% instilled twice daily with topical chloramphenicol instilled five times daily in the treatment of acute bacterial conjunctivitis. 191 patients (lomefloxacin 96, chloramphenicol 95) were enrolled in this study with clinically diagnosed acute bacterial conjunctivitis. The two treatment groups were similar at baseline. The treatments were equally effective and significantly (p < 0.001) reduced the Cumulative Sum Score of the clinical signs and symptoms of bacterial conjunctivitis. At the end of the trial, there was no difference between the two treatments in the Cumulative Sum Score of signs and symptoms (p = 0.63), and the investigator (p = 0.28) and patients’ (p = 0.50) assessments of the success of therapy. The two drugs were equally well tolerated locally, with no serious systemic or local adverse drug reactions reported in any study patient. Bacteriological confirmation of acute conjunctivitis was possible in 96 patients (lomefloxacin 47, chloramphenicol 49) out of the 191 enrolled. Both treatments significantly (p < 0.001) reduced the conjunctival bacterial colony count score with no difference (p = 0.12) between the two treatment groups. In conclusion, lomefloxacin 0.3% eye drops instilled twice daily were as effective and well tolerated as chloramphenicol 0.5% eye drops instilled 5 times daily in the treatment of acute bacterial conjunctivitis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Uchida Y. Clinical efficacy of topical lomefloxacin (NY-198) in bacterial infections of the external eye — a multicentre double blind phase III study. Folia Ophthalmol Jpn 1991; 42: 52–70

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wadworth AN, Goa KL. Lomefloxacin — a review of its antibacterial activity, pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic use. Drugs 1991; 42: 1018–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hirose T, Okezaki E, Kato H, et al. In. vitro and in. vivo activity of NY-198, a new difluorinated quinolone. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1987; 31: 854–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Hatano H, Inoue K, Shia S, et al. Application of topical lomefloxacin against experimental Pseudomonas endophthalmitis in rabbits. Acta Ophthalmol 1993; 71: 666–70

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Colin J, Malet F, Jauch A, et al. Bacterial keratitis therapy in guinea pigs with lomefloxacin with initially high — followed by low — dosage regimen. Ophthalmic Res 1995; 27: 322–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Malminiemi K, Kari O, Latvala ML, et al. Topical lomefloxacin twice daily compared with fusidic acid in acute bacterial conjunctivitis. Acta Ophthalmol 1996; 74: 280–4

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Elena PP, Jauch A. Ocular distribution of lomefloxacin 0.3% after a single instillation in the infected eye of pigmented rabbits. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 1997. In press

  8. Fukuda M, Jing Sheng Chou, Sasaki K. Intraocular dynamics of a new antibacterial derivative of pyridone carboxylic acid (NY-198). Folia Ophthalmol Jpn 1989; 40: 72–6

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kodama T. Penetration of lomefloxacin ophthalmic solution (NY-198) into the human aqueous humor. J Jpn Rev Ophthalmol 1991; 85: 493–5

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ooishi M, Oomomo A, Sakaue F, et al. Studies on intraocular penetration of NY-198 (lomefloxacin) eye drops. Acta Soc Ophthalmol Jpn 1988; 92: 1825–32

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Doona M, Walsh JB. Use of chloramphenicol as a topical eye medication: time to cry halt? BMJ 1995; 310: 1217–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Bron AJ, Leber G, Rizk SNM, et al. Ofloxacin compared with chloramphenicol in the management of external ocular infection. Br J Ophthalmol 1991; 75: 675–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Miller IM, Wittreich JM, Cook T, et al. The safety and efficacy of topical norfloxacin compared with chloramphenicol for the treatment of external ocular bacterial infections. Eye 1992; 6: 111–4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Power WJ, Collum LMT, Easty DL, et al. Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of ciprofloxacin ophthalmic solution versus chloramphenicol. Eur J Ophthalmol 1993; 3: 77–82

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Sunder Raj.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Agius-Fernandez, A., Patterson, A., Fsadni, M. et al. Topical Lomefloxacin versus Topical Chloramphenicol in the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Conjunctivitis. Clin. Drug Investig. 15, 263–269 (1998). https://doi.org/10.2165/00044011-199815040-00001

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00044011-199815040-00001

Keywords

Navigation