- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT01193127
Safety and Efficacy of OMS302 in Subjects Undergoing Unilateral Cataract Extraction With Lens Replacement (CELR)
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Phase
- Phase 2
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Arizona
-
Chandler, Arizona, United States, 85224
-
Glendale, Arizona, United States, 85308
-
-
Arkansas
-
Little Rock, Arkansas, United States, 72205
-
-
California
-
Los Angeles, California, United States, 90013
-
-
Colorado
-
Parker, Colorado, United States, 80134
-
-
Florida
-
Largo, Florida, United States, 33770
-
North Ft. Myers, Florida, United States, 33903
-
Panama City, Florida, United States, 32405
-
Tamarac, Florida, United States, 33321
-
-
Illinois
-
Gurnee, Illinois, United States, 60031
-
-
Louisiana
-
Gretna, Louisiana, United States, 70056
-
-
Missouri
-
Kansas City, Missouri, United States, 64111
-
St. Louis, Missouri, United States, 63131
-
-
Nebraska
-
Omaha, Nebraska, United States, 68131
-
-
Nevada
-
Las Vegas, Nevada, United States, 89135
-
-
New Mexico
-
Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States, 87113
-
-
New York
-
Rockville Centre, New York, United States, 11570
-
-
Pennsylvania
-
Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania, United States, 19004
-
-
Tennessee
-
Goodlettsville, Tennessee, United States, 37072
-
-
Texas
-
Austin, Texas, United States, 78731
-
Houston, Texas, United States, 77024
-
Nacogdoches, Texas, United States, 75965
-
San Antonio, Texas, United States, 78229
-
-
Utah
-
Salt Lake City, Utah, United States, 84132
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Competent and willing to voluntarily provide informed consent
- 18 years of age or older
- In good general health needing to undergo cataract extraction with lens replacement surgery in one eye, under topical anesthesia
- Other inclusion criteria to be evaluated by the investigator
Exclusion Criteria:
- No allergies to the medications and/or the active ingredients of any of the study medications
- No medications with the same activities as the of the active ingredients in OMS302 for defined time intervals prior to and after surgery
- No other significant eye injuries, eye conditions or general medical conditions likely to interfere with the evaluation of the study medication
- Other exclusion criteria to be evaluated by the investigator
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Factorial Assignment
- Masking: Double
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: OMS302 Solution
|
|
|
Experimental: OMS302 Mydriatic Solution
|
|
|
Experimental: OMS302 Anti-inflammatory Solution
|
|
|
Placebo Comparator: Balanced Salt Solution (BSS) Solution
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Pupil Diameter (mm) During Surgery
Time Frame: During surgery (immediately prior to surgical incision to wound closure)
|
Pupil diameter from surgical baseline (immediately prior to surgical incision) to the end of the surgical procedure (wound closure) was summarized using descriptive statistics by treatment group and time point.
Repeated measures analyses of variance were used to test for differences in the maintenance of mydriasis.
The repeated measures model included change from baseline pupil diameter as the response variable and treatment (OMS302, ketorolac tromethamine, and vehicle), time point (as a categorical variable) and the stratification factor lens opacities classification system II (LOCS II) grade as predictor variables.
A generalized estimating equation (GEE) approach with an AR(1) working-correlation structure was used.
|
During surgery (immediately prior to surgical incision to wound closure)
|
|
Ocular Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score (mm) Within 12 Hours Postoperatively
Time Frame: through 12 hours post-surgery
|
For the primary analysis of this endpoint, only the results on the day of operation at 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10-12 hours were utilized.
The VAS scores (where 0 = no pain and 100 = worst possible pain) were summarized by treatment group and time point.
Repeated measures analyses of variance were used to test for differences in postoperative ocular pain.
The repeated measures model included VAS pain score as the response variable and treatment (OMS302, phenylephrine hydrochloride (PE), and vehicle), time point (as a categorical variable) and the stratification factor LOCS II grade as predictor variables.
A generalized estimating equation (GEE) approach with an AR(1) working correlation structure was used.
|
through 12 hours post-surgery
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Tearing, Two Hours Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Two hours
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Two hours
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Tearing, Six Hours Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Six hours
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Six hours
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Tearing, One Day Post-Surgery
Time Frame: One day
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
One day
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Tearing, Two Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Two days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Two days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Tearing, Seven Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Seven days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Seven days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Tearing, 14 Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: 14 days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
14 days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Tearing, 30 Days Post-Surgery/ Early Termination
Time Frame: up to 30 days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
up to 30 days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Photophobia Two Hours Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Two hours
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Two hours
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Photophobia Six Hours Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Six hours
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Six hours
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Photophobia One Day Post-Surgery
Time Frame: One day
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
One day
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Photophobia Two Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Two days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Two days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Photophobia Seven Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Seven days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Seven days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Photophobia 14 Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: 14 days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
14 days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Photophobia 30 Days Post-Surgery /Early Termination
Time Frame: Up to 30 days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Up to 30 days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Eye Discharge 2 Hours Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Two hours
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Two hours
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Eye Discharge Six Hours Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Six hours
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Six hours
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Eye Discharge One Day Post-Surgery
Time Frame: One day
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
One day
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Eye Discharge Two Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Two days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Two days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Eye Discharge Seven Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Seven days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Seven days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Eye Discharge 14 Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: 14 days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
14 days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Eye Discharge 30 Days Post-Surgery/Early Termination
Time Frame: Up to 30 days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Up to 30 days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Itching Two Hours Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Two hours
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Two hours
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Itching 6 Hours Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Six hours
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Six hours
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Itching One Day Post-Surgery
Time Frame: One day
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
One day
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Itching Two Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Two days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Two days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Itching Seven Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Seven days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Seven days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Itching 14 Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: 14 days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
14 days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Itching 30 Days Post-Surgery/Early Termination
Time Frame: Up to 30 days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Up to 30 days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Foreign Body Sensation Two Hours Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Two hours
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Two hours
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Foreign Body Sensation Six Hours Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Six hours
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Six hours
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Foreign Body Sensation One Day Post-Surgery
Time Frame: One day
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
One day
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Foreign Body Sensation Two Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Two days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Two days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Foreign Body Sensation Seven Days Post-Surgery 7 Days
Time Frame: Seven days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Seven days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Foreign Body Sensation 14 Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: 14 days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
14 days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Foreign Body Sensation 30 Days Post-Surgery/Early Termination
Time Frame: Up to 30 days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Up to 30 days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Haziness Two Hours Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Two hours
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Two hours
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Haziness Six Hours Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Six hours
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Six hours
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Haziness One Day Post-Surgery
Time Frame: One day
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
One day
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Haziness Two Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Two days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Two days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Haziness Seven Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Seven days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Seven days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Haziness 14 Days Post-Surgery
Time Frame: 14 days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
14 days
|
|
Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Haziness 30 Days Post-Surgery/Early Termination
Time Frame: Up to 30 days
|
The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness).
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
Up to 30 days
|
|
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Baseline
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity log score.
For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons.
Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis.
Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.
|
Baseline
|
|
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Day 1
Time Frame: One day
|
Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the ETDRS visual acuity log score.
For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons.
Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis.
Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.
|
One day
|
|
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Day 2
Time Frame: Two days
|
Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the ETDRS visual acuity log score.
For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons.
Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis.
Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.
|
Two days
|
|
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Day 7
Time Frame: Seven days
|
Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the ETDRS visual acuity log score.
For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons.
Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis.
Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.
|
Seven days
|
|
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Day 14
Time Frame: 14 days
|
Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the ETDRS visual acuity log score.
For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons.
Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis.
Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.
|
14 days
|
|
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Day 30
Time Frame: 30 days
|
Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the ETDRS visual acuity log score.
For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons.
Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis.
Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.
|
30 days
|
|
Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Baseline
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8. Grading was as follows: Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells. Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous |
Baseline
|
|
Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, 2 Hours Post Surgery
Time Frame: Two hours
|
TPostoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8. Grading was as follows: Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells. Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous |
Two hours
|
|
Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Day 1
Time Frame: One day
|
Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8. Grading was as follows: Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells. Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous |
One day
|
|
Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Day 2
Time Frame: Two days
|
Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8. Grading was as follows: Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells. Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous |
Two days
|
|
Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Day 7
Time Frame: Seven days
|
Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8. Grading was as follows: Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells. Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous |
Seven days
|
|
Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Day 14
Time Frame: 14 days
|
Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8. Grading was as follows: Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells. Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous |
14 days
|
|
Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Day 30
Time Frame: 30 days
|
Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8. Grading was as follows: Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells. Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous |
30 days
|
|
Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Baseline
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8. Grading was as follows: Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells. Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous |
Baseline
|
|
Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Two Hours Post-surgery
Time Frame: Two hours
|
Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8. Grading was as follows: Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells. Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous |
Two hours
|
|
Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Day 1
Time Frame: One day
|
Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8. Grading was as follows: Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells. Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous |
One day
|
|
Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Day 2
Time Frame: Two days
|
Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8. Grading was as follows: Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells. Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous |
Two days
|
|
Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Day 7
Time Frame: Seven days
|
Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8. Grading was as follows: Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells. Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous |
Seven days
|
|
Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Day 14
Time Frame: 14 days
|
Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8. Grading was as follows: Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells. Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous |
14 days
|
|
Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Day 30
Time Frame: 30 days
|
Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8. Grading was as follows: Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells. Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous |
30 days
|
|
Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Two Hours Post-Surgery
Time Frame: Two hours
|
The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts.
If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.
|
Two hours
|
|
Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Day 1
Time Frame: One day
|
The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts.
If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.
|
One day
|
|
Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Day 2
Time Frame: Two days
|
The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts.
If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.
|
Two days
|
|
Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Day 7
Time Frame: Seven days
|
The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts.
If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.
|
Seven days
|
|
Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Day 14
Time Frame: 14 days
|
The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts.
If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.
|
14 days
|
|
Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Day 30
Time Frame: 30 days
|
The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts.
If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.
|
30 days
|
|
Ocular Pain VAS Score After Day 0
Time Frame: 43 days
|
VAS pain scores (where 0 = no pain and 100 = worst possible pain) after the day of surgery were summarized.
|
43 days
|
|
Postoperative Use of Ophthalmic Anti-inflammatory Medications
Time Frame: up to 30 days
|
Ophthalmic anti-inflammatory medications were identified by reviewing concomitant medications.
Subject incidence of ophthalmic anti-inflammatory medication use by post-surgery day was presented.
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
up to 30 days
|
|
Use of Pain Medications at Day 1
Time Frame: One day
|
Ocular pain medications were identified by reviewing concomitant medications.
Subject incidence of ocular pain medication use at day 1 and post day 1 were presented.
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
One day
|
|
Use of Pain Medications After Day 1
Time Frame: up to 30 days
|
Ocular pain medications were identified by reviewing concomitant medications.
Subject incidence of ocular pain medication use at day 1 and post day 1 were presented.
Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.
|
up to 30 days
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Estimate)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Estimate)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- C09-001
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Cataract
-
Colvard Kandavel Eye CenterEnrolling by invitationCataract | Cataract Bilateral | Cataract Surgery | Cataract (Post-operative Cataract Surgery Follow-up)United States
-
Matthew RauenNot yet recruitingNuclear Cataract | Cataract Surgery Anesthesia | Cataract and IOL Surgery | Cataract Surgery ExperienceUnited States
-
Züleyha SönmezAtaturk UniversityActive, not recruitingCataract Surgery | Cataract Patients | Cataract After SurgeryTurkey (Türkiye)
-
Stanford UniversityEnrolling by invitationIntraocular Lens | Cataract Extraction | Cataract Surgery | Eye Disorders | Cataract and IOL Surgery | Cataract Surgery ExperienceUnited States
-
Gemini Eye ClinicRecruitingBilateral Cataract | Unilateral CataractCzechia
-
Seva Canada SocietyPragyaan Sustainable Health Outcomes Foundation; Sadgura Netra ChikitsalayaNot yet recruitingCataract (Post-operative Cataract Surgery Follow-up)
-
Fundación Pública Andaluza para la Investigación...CompletedCataract | Cataract Mature | Cataract, Nuclear
-
Nicole Fram M.D.RecruitingCataract Bilateral | Nuclear Sclerosis of the Lens | Phacoemulsification Cataract SurgeryUnited States
-
Johannes Kepler University of LinzCompletedCataract Complicated | Cataract Complications OperationsAustria
-
Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal...Not yet recruitingCataract | Cataract Bilateral | Cataract Surgery
Clinical Trials on OMS302 Solution
-
Omeros CorporationCompletedCataract ExtractionUnited States
-
Omeros CorporationTerminatedIntraocular Lens Replacement | Intraoperative Floppy Iris SyndromeAustria, Germany
-
Omeros CorporationCompletedIntraocular Lens ReplacementUnited States, Netherlands
-
Omeros CorporationCompletedIntraocular Lens ReplacementUnited States
-
RudacureNot yet recruiting
-
CooperVision, Inc.CompletedCorneal StainingUnited States
-
Shandong UniversityUnknownImage Quality of Early Esophageal Squamous Neoplasia | Endoscopists'Subjective AssessmentsChina
-
Shandong UniversityCompletedImage Quality | Mucosal IrritationChina
-
University of NottinghamUnknownPatients Undergoing Open Resection of Colorectal TumoursUnited Kingdom