Comparison of the efficacy and safety of two formulations of diclofenac sodium 0.1% eyedrops in controlling postoperative inflammation after cataract surgery.

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and safety of diclofenac sodium 0.1% eyedrops packaged in an Abak multidose container without preservative (Dicloabak) with the reference product, sodium merthiolate-preserved diclofenac sodium 0.1% eyedrops, in controlling postoperative inflammation after cataract surgery.

METHODS

The multicenter, controlled, randomized, single-masked study included 194 patients (Dicloabak 96, preserved diclofenac 98) scheduled to have cataract surgery by phacoemulsification with foldable intraocular lens. All were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively after 1, 7, and 28 days. Postoperative inflammation was measured by the total score of anterior chamber cells and flare. Ocular plin, conjunctival hyperemia and ciliary flush were also assessed. Postoperative patient assessments also included visual acuity, objective tolerance by slit-lamp, fluorescein test, and subjective evaluation of local tolerance.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in the total score of flare and cells or the degree of conjunctival hyperemia and ciliary flush at any study visit. Dicloabak was demonstrated to be not inferior to preserved diclofenac at all assessment times. The overall assessment of local tolerance was similar for both study medications.

CONCLUSIONS

Preservative suppression did not alter diclofenac efficacy. Results support the good safety profile of both formulations when dosed three times daily for 4 weeks in absence of concomitant use of drugs potentially toxic for cornea. Preservative-free formulations like Dicloabak should be preferred to generic diclofenac formulations including other ingredients and may improve the safety profile of this topical nonsteroid anti-inflammatory drug.