Euphrasia Eye Drops in Preterm Neonates With Ocular Discharge: A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial

Delphine Meier-Girard, Gisa Gerstenberg, Liliane Stoffel, Therese Kohler, Sabine D Klein, Marco Eschenmoser, Vera Ruth Mitter, Mathias Nelle, Ursula Wolf, Delphine Meier-Girard, Gisa Gerstenberg, Liliane Stoffel, Therese Kohler, Sabine D Klein, Marco Eschenmoser, Vera Ruth Mitter, Mathias Nelle, Ursula Wolf

Abstract

Aim: To investigate whether the early administration of Euphrasia eye drops® in preterm neonates presenting with ocular discharge fosters the resolution of the ocular discharge and reduces the need for topical antibiotic therapy, as compared to placebo. Methods: We conducted a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial at the University Children's Hospital Bern, Switzerland. Preterm neonates with white, yellow, or green ocular discharge were included. Infants were randomly assigned (1:1) to the Euphrasia arm (Euphrasia eye drops®, Weleda AG, Arlesheim) or the placebo arm (NaCl 0.9%). Euphrasia or placebo was administrated at a dose of one drop in each eye four times a day over a period of 96 h. The primary outcome was the treatment success, defined as no ocular discharge at 96 h and no use of topical antibiotic therapy during the 96-h intervention. Results: A total of 114 neonates were screened and 84 were randomized. Among neonates in the Euphrasia arm, 22 (55.0%) achieved our primary outcome compared to 21 (51.2%) in the placebo arm (p = 0.85). In the Euphrasia arm, time to resolution of reddening tended to fall within the shorter bracket of 24 to 48 h (24 (92.3%) vs. 12 (80.0%) in the placebo arm, p = 0.34) and relapse or first signs of reddening during the 96-h intervention tended to be lower [3 (7.9%) eyes vs. 8 (18.2%) eyes in the placebo arm, p = 0.17]. Tearing at 96 h tended to be lower in the Euphrasia arm [5 (12.8%) eyes in the Euphrasia arm vs. 12 (27.3%) eyes in the placebo arm, p = 0.10]. Discussion: Euphrasia did not significantly improve treatment success, defined as no ocular discharge at 96 h and no use of topical antibiotic therapy during the 96-h intervention. However, results suggest that Euphrasia may be of benefit for symptoms such as reddening and tearing, and thus improve the comfort of patients. Trial Registration: The trial is registered at the US National Institutes of Health (ClinicalTrials.gov) NCT04122300 and at the portal for human research in Switzerland SNCTP000003490.

Keywords: Euphrasia drops; complementary medicine; congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction; ocular discharge; preterm neonate.

Copyright © 2020 Meier-Girard, Gerstenberg, Stoffel, Kohler, Klein, Eschenmoser, Mitter, Nelle and Wolf.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Participant flow.

References

    1. Moore DL, MacDonald NE. Canadian Paediatric Society Infectious Diseases and Immunization Committee. Preventing ophthalmia neonatorum. Paediatr Child Health. (2015) 20:93–6.
    1. Mohile M, Deorari AK, Satpathy G, Sharma A, Singh M. Microbiological study of neonatal conjunctivitis with special reference to Chlamydia trachomatis. Indian J Ophthalmol. (2002) 50:295–9.
    1. Kapoor V, Whyte R, Vedula S. Interventions for preventing ophthalmia neonatorum. Cochrane Protocols. (2016) 2016:CD001862 10.1002/14651858.CD001862.pub3
    1. Zloto O, Gharaibeh A, Mezer E, Stankovic B, Isenberg S, Wygnanski-Jaffe T. Ophthalmia neonatorum treatment and prophylaxis: IPOSC global study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. (2016) 254:577–82. 10.1007/s00417-016-3274-5
    1. MacEwen CJ, Young JD. Epiphora during the first year of life. Eye. (1991) 5:596–600. 10.1038/eye.1991.103
    1. Usha K, Smitha S, Shah N, Lalitha P, Kelkar R. Spectrum and the susceptibilities of microbial isolates in cases of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. JAAPOS. (2006) 10:469–72. 10.1016/j.jaapos.2006.04.009
    1. Snowe RJ, Wilfert CM. Epidemic reappearance of gonococcal ophthalmia neonatorum. Pediatrics. (1973) 51:110–4.
    1. Isenberg SJ, Apt L, Wood M. The influence of perinatal infective factors on ophthalmia neonatorum. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. (1996) 33:185–8.
    1. Yetman RJ, Coody DK. Conjunctivitis: a practice guideline. J Pediatr Health Care. (1997) 11:238–41. 10.1016/S0891-5245(97)90109-7
    1. Kuchar A, Lukas J, Steinkogler FJ. Bacteriology and antibiotic therapy in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. (2000) 78:694–8. 10.1034/j.1600-0420.2000.078006694.x
    1. Paysse EA, Coats DK. Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction (Dacryostenosis) and Dacryocystocele. (2018). Available online at: (accessed July 27, 2020).
    1. Stoffel L, Zimmermann D, Hunkeler R, Zimmermann C, Ramos M, Fathi-Torriani M, et al. Euphrasia-Augentropfen bei Neugeborenen: Ein Pilotprojekt. Schweiz Zschr Ganzheitsmedizin. (2007) 19:254–9. 10.1159/000283798
    1. Stoss M, Michels C, Peter E, Beutke R, Gorter RW. Prospective cohort trial of Euphrasia single-dose eye drops in conjunctivitis. J Altern Complement Med. (2000) 6:499–508. 10.1089/acm.2000.6.499
    1. Bielory L, Heimall J. Review of complementary and alternative medicine in treatment of ocular allergies. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. (2003) 3:395–9. 10.1097/00130832-200310000-00013
    1. Toelg M. Anwendungsbeobachtung zur Wirksamkeit und Verträglichkeit von WELEDA Euphrasia D3 Augentropfen bei Kindern mit katarrhalischer oder allergischer Bindehautentzündung. Merkurstab. (2005) 58:43–7.
    1. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; (2018).
    1. Lee MJ, Park J, Kim N, Choung HK, Khwarg S, et al. . Conservative management of congenital dacryocystocele: resolution and complications. Can J Ophthalmol. (2019) 54:421–5. 10.1016/j.jcjo.2018.08.006
    1. Olitsky SE. Update on congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Int Ophthalmol Clin. (2014) 54:1–7. 10.1097/IIO.0000000000000030
    1. Vagge A, Ferro Desideri L, Nucci P, Serafino M, Giannaccare G, Lembo A, et al. . Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction (CNLDO): a review. Diseases. (2018) 6:96. 10.3390/diseases6040096
    1. Kashkouli MB, Beigi B, Parvaresh MM, Kassaee A, Tabatabaee Z. Late and very late initial probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: what is the cause of failure? Br J Ophthalmol. (2003) 87:1151–3. 10.1136/bjo.87.9.1151
    1. Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Grouo. Repka MX, Melia BM, Beck RW, et al. (2008). Primary treatment of nasolacrimal duct obstruction with nasolacrimal duct intubation in children younger than 4 years of age. J AAPOS 12:445–50. 10.1016/j.jaapos.2008.03.005
    1. Takahashi Y, Kakizaki H, Chan WO, Selva D. Management of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Acta Ophthalmol. (2010) 88:506–13. 10.1111/j.1755-3768.2009.01592.x
    1. Sathiamoorthi S, Frank RD, Mohney BG. Incidence and clinical characteristics of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Br J Ophthalmol. (2018) 103:527–9. 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2018-312074
    1. Isenberg SJ, Apt L, McCarty J, Cooper LL, Lim L, et al. . Development of tearing in preterm and term neonates. Arch Ophthalmol. (1998) 116:773–6. 10.1001/archopht.116.6.773
    1. Toker E, Yenice O, Ogut MS, Akman I, Ozek E. Tear production during the neonatal period. Am J Ophthalmol. (2002) 133:746–9. 10.1016/S0002-9394(02)01393-4
    1. Stolovitch C, Michaeli A. Hydrostatic pressure as an office procedure for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. J AAPOS. (2006) 10:269–72. 10.1016/j.jaapos.2006.02.009

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다