The impact of latanoprost glaucoma eyedrops with and without preservatives on the ocular surface parameters – a case series report Case series report

Main Article Content

Jaromir Wasyluk
Grzegorz Rotuski
Marta Dubisz
Magdalena Cichowska
Radosław Różycki

Abstract

Background: Preservatives and additives commonly found in ophthalmic solutions can aggravate the symptoms of dry eye disease, a condition that already affects a large percentage of the global population. These additives are also frequently present in topical medications for glaucoma, another widespread disorder impacting several millions of individuals worldwide being on a persistent anti-glaucoma therapy. With the continued aging of populations, the prevalence of both diseases is expected to rise.


Methods: Four patients diagnosed with glaucoma, who were on topical latanoprost monotherapy were switched from the preservative prescription to a preservative-free analogue. Lubricating eye drops were withdrawn 4 weeks prior and restrained from use during the 3 months observation period. Tear break-up time, interferometry, conjunctival redness, tear film osmometry, along with a dry eye disease questionnaire were performed at each timepoint to assess changes on the ocular surface condition. Standard ophthalmic examination was also performed.


Results: Conjunctival redness remained constant at all timepoints. Tear film osmolarity decreased in all patients and so did the Ocular Surface Disease Index. As for the tear break-up time and interferometry, tendencies of the results were inconclusive. Best corrected visual acuity and intraocular pressure remained stable throughout the study.


Conclusions: Preservative-free topical glaucoma therapies appear to be better tolerated and impose less burden on the ocular surface. Such formulations should be prioritized for glaucoma patients, who often require life-long treatment. Given the chronic nature of dry eye disease and the absence of regenerative options for the lacrimal and meibomian glands, preventive strategies are of critical importance.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
1.
Wasyluk J, Rotuski G, Dubisz M, Cichowska M, Różycki R. The impact of latanoprost glaucoma eyedrops with and without preservatives on the ocular surface parameters – a case series report. Ophthatherapy [Internet]. 2025Jun.30 [cited 2026Feb.22];12(2):129-35. Available from: https://journalsmededu.pl/index.php/ophthatherapy/article/view/3399
Section
Conservative treatment

References

1. Yu K, Bunya V, Maguire M et al.; Dry Eye Assessment and Management Study Research Group. Systemic Conditions Associated with Severity of Dry Eye Signs and Symptoms in the Dry Eye Assessment and Management Study. Ophthalmology. 2021; 128(10): 1384-92. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2021.03.030.
2. Kemer ÖE, Mekala P, Dave B et al. Managing Ocular Surface Disease in Glaucoma Treatment: A Systematic Review. Bioengineering (Basel). 2024; 11(10): 1010. http://doi.org/ 10.3390/bioengineering11101010.
3. Sutcliffe N, Recchioni A, Hilmi S et al. What’s new in ocular and oral aspects of Sjögren’s syndrome and do new treatments work? Rheumatology (Oxford). 2021; 60(3): 1034-41. http://doi.org/ 10.1093/rheumatology/keaa854.
4. Duru N, Altinkaynak H, Uysal BS et al. Increased Tear Film Osmolarity in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Semin Ophthalmol. 2017; 32(5): 582-7. http://doi.org/10.3109/08820538.2015.1131838.
5. Iskandar K, Marchin L, Kodjikian L et al. Highlighting the Microbial Contamination of the Dropper Tip and Cap of In-Use Eye Drops, the Associated Contributory Factors, and the Risk of Infection: A Past-30-Years Literature Review. Pharmaceutics. 2022; 14(10): 2176. http://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics14102176.
6. European Glaucoma Society Terminology and Guidelines for Glaucoma, 5th Edition. Br J Ophthalmol. 2021; 105(Suppl 1): 1-169. http://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2021-egsguidelines .
7. Romano J, Ferreira N, Godinho G et al. Understanding Ocular Surface Disease in Glaucoma: A Comparative Analysis of Symptoms and Objective Parameters. Cureus. 2024; 16(2): e54070. http://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.54070.
8. Kahook MY, Rapuano CJ, Messmer EM et al. Preservatives and ocular surface disease: A review. Ocul Surf. 2024; 34: 213-24. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtos.2024.08.001.
9. Kemer ÖE, Mekala P, Dave B et al. Managing Ocular Surface Disease in Glaucoma Treatment: A Systematic Review. Bioengineering (Basel). 2024; 11(10): 1010. http://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11101010.
10. Lee SY, Wong TT, Chua J et al. Effect of chronic anti-glaucoma medications and trabeculectomy on tear osmolarity. Eye (Lond). 2013; 27(10) :1142-50. http://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2013.144.
11. Baudouin C, Kolko M, Melik-Parsadaniantz S et al. Inflammation in Glaucoma: From the back to the front of the eye, and beyond. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2021; 83: 100916. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.preteyeres.2020.100916.
12. Kestelyn PA, Kestelyn PG, De Bacquer D et al. Switch from BAK-preserved to preservative-free latanoprost decreases anterior chamber flare in POAG patients. Int Ophthalmol. 2019; 39(1): 105-9. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-017-0792-z.
13. Baudouin C, Renard JP, Nordmann JP et al. Prevalence and risk factors for ocular surface disease among patients treated over the long term for glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2012: 0. http://doi.org/10.5301/ejo.5000181.
14. Kolko M, Gazzard G, Baudouin C et al. Impact of glaucoma medications on the ocular surface and how ocular surface disease can influence glaucoma treatment. Ocul Surf. 2023; 29: 456-68. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtos.2023.05.012.
15. Leung EW, Medeiros FA, Weinreb RN. Prevalence of ocular surface disease in glaucoma patients. J Glaucoma. 2008; 17(5): 350-5. http://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0b013e31815c5f4f .
16. Sheppard J, Shen Lee B et al. Dry eye disease: identification and therapeutic strategies for primary care clinicians and clinical specialists. Ann Med. 2023; 55(1): 241-52. http://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2022.2157477.
17. Figus M, Sacchi M, Rossi GC et al. Ocular surface and glaucoma, a mutual relationship. Practical suggestions for classification and management. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2023 Aug 30:11206721231199157. http://doi.org/10.1177/11206721231199157.
18. Chawla A, McGalliard JN, Batterbury M. Use of eyedrops in glaucoma: how can we help to reduce non-compliance? Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2007; 85(4): 464. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0420.2007.00882.x .
19. Stalmans I, Lemij H, Clarke J et al.; GOAL study group. Signs and Symptoms of Ocular Surface Disease: The Reasons for Patient Dissatisfaction with Glaucoma Treatments. Clin Ophthalmol. 2020; 14: 3675-80. http://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S269586.
20. Rossi GC, Pasinetti GM, Scudeller L et al. Risk factors to develop ocular surface disease in treated glaucoma or ocular hypertension patients. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2013; 23(3): 296-302. http://doi.org/10.5301/ejo.5000220.
21. Mohammed I, Kulkarni B, Faraj LA ety al. Profiling ocular surface responses to preserved and non-preserved topical glaucoma medications: A 2-year randomized evaluation study. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2020; 48(7): 973-82. http://doi.org/10.1111/ceo.13814.