ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Ocular Tolerability of Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL Preservative-Free versus Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL with Benzalkonium Chloride or Bimatoprost 0.3 mg/mL Preservative-Free in Patients with Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Benefits of Preservative-Free Treatment for Glaucoma with a Focus on Preservative-Free Latanoprost.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Review
- Bimatoprost Intracameral Implant (Durysta®): A New Era in Glaucoma Management Through Sustained-Release Innovation.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Review
- From Eye Care to Hair Growth: Bimatoprost.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Safety profile of 0.0015% tafluprost eye drops in China: a post-marketing observational study.International journal of ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Cytotoxicity, Mitochondrial Functionality, and Redox Status of Human Conjunctival Cells after Short and Chronic Exposure to Preservative-Free Bimatoprost 0.03% and 0.01%: An In Vitro Comparative Study.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate whether the therapeutic switch from a formulation of Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL with benzalkonium chloride (BAK) or Bimatoprost 0.3 mg/mL preservative-free to a formulation of Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL preservative-free could improve eye surface conditions in patients with glaucoma; intraocular pressure (IOP) was also evaluated. All patients meeting the inclusion criteria were eligible for the therapeutic switch to Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL preservative-free. At each check visit, enrolled patients underwent a break-up time (BUT) test, an ocular surface disease index (OSDI) test, and a three-point tonometric curve. A total of 40 patients were enrolled (23 were in therapy with Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL with BAK and 17 with Bimatoprost 0.3 mg/mL preservative-free). Significant differences of OSDI and BUT between Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL with BAK at baseline vs. Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL preservative-free at 14 and 28 days (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.0003, respectively) were recorded. Similarly, significant differences of OSDI and BUT between Bimatoprost 0.3 mg/mL preservative-free at baseline vs. Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL preservative-free at 14 and 28 days (p < 0.0001 for both) were found. Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL preservative-free has a better tolerability profile associated with non-therapeutical inferiority in the control of IOP compared to the other Bimatoprost formulations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.