|Year : 1985 | Volume
| Issue : 5 | Page : 295-297
Efficacy of medrysone as anti-inflammatory agent
RK Rastogi, Arun Mathur, IN Raizada
Upgraded Department of Ophthalmology., L.L.R.M. Medical College, Meerut, India
Upgraded Department of Ophthalmology., L.L.R.M. Medical College, Meerut
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
|How to cite this article:|
Rastogi R K, Mathur A, Raizada I N. Efficacy of medrysone as anti-inflammatory agent. Indian J Ophthalmol 1985;33:295-7
|How to cite this URL:|
Rastogi R K, Mathur A, Raizada I N. Efficacy of medrysone as anti-inflammatory agent. Indian J Ophthalmol [serial online] 1985 [cited 2021 Jan 24];33:295-7. Available from: https://www.ijo.in/text.asp?1985/33/5/295/30734
Medrysone is one of the progesterone related compound which has been claimed not to elevate intraocular pressure yet it has got beneficial anti-inflammatory property. Medrysone differs from progesterone in possession of 6-methyl and 11-hydroxyl group both of which account for its antiinflammatory activity. The aim of the study was to determine efficacy of medrysone 1.0% as ocular anti-inflammatory agent in comparison to dexamethasone 0.1% in cases of spring catarrh and uncomplicated iritis.
| Material and methods|| |
The study was conducted in two parts. In part I, 52 cases of bilaterally active spring catarrh were selected. These cases were having lesions of almost same severity in both eyes. All patients were graded according to severity of ocular symptoms and signs on initial and subsequent visits as follows
Symptoms : itching, redness, photophobia, foreign body sensation, tearing and ropy discharge.
Conjunctival signs : Hyperemia, oedema, discharge and giant papillae.
Limbal signs : Limbal signs were graded according to limbal oedema and infiltration.
All these patients were treated with medrysone 1.0% in right eye and dexamethasone 0.1% in left eye in similar frequency of 4-6 times a day for 4 weeks. Every patient was followed up every week and his signs and symptoms noted and graded.
In II part 30 cases of uncomplicated iritis were selected. Diagnosis was made on the basis of symptoms of pain, lacrimation, photophobia and signs of ciliary congestion, aqeous flare, presence of Kps formation of synechiae, change in size, shape and reaction of pupil.
Out of 30 cases 15 were treated with dexamethasone 0.1%, and 15 cases with medrysone 1.0%, 4 to 6 times per day. Adjuvant therapy like local atropine, antibiotics, local heat, dark glasses analgesics were given in all cases. Total duration of treatment was of 4 weeks. All cases were followed up once a week. At each visit the state of their signs and symptoms were noted.
| Observations|| |
Part I: There were 52 cases of spring catarrh, 34 males and 18 females in age group ranging from 10 to 30 years. Majority of the patients were less than 20 years. Out of 52 cases 30 (57.7%) were of palpabral spring catarrh and 22 (42.3%) of bulbar spring catarrh. Initially the symptoms were severe in both eyes in all 52 cases. 40 patients had severe and 12 moderate conjunctival signs. One patient showed severe, 17 moderate and 4 mild limbal signs in both eyes. After 4 weeks of treatment in medrysone treated right eyes, none was having severe symptoms, 4 and 28 were having moderate and mild symptoms respectively, while 20 were free from all symptoms. In dexamethasone treated left eyes, after 4 weeks, symptoms were severe in none, moderate in 1, mild in 9 and in 42 there was no symptoms at all. Among right eyes none showed severe, 3 moderate and 28 mild conjunctival signs. Among left eyes the conjunctival signs were severe and moderate in none, only 9 had mild while none in 43-Limbal signs were present in mild degree in 7 right eyes and in 2 of left eyes.
Part II:- Out of 30 cases of uncomplicated iritis 16 were male and 14 female in age ranging from 20-54 years.
In dexamethasone treated eyes initially 6 cases were having severe and 9 moderate symptoms. All cases were having circumciliary congestion and aquous flare/KPs and 6 cases showed pupiilary changes. After treatment symptoms were present only in 2 in moderate degree and 3 in mild degree. In 10 cases there was no aqueous flare/KPs. or circumciliary congestion. Pupillary changes were present only in 3 cases.
In medrysone treated eyes initially symptoms were severe in 5 and moderate in 10 cases. All of them had circumciliary congestion and aqeous flare and Kps. 7 cases showed pupillary changes. After treatment one case still had severe, 7 moderate and 5 mild symptoms. Circumciliary congestion and aquous flare/KPs were present in 13 cases. 6 cases still showed pupillary changes. Thus medrysone showed poor response in controlling iritis.
| Discussion|| |
Medrysone 1.0% has been claimed to as therapeutically as effective as dexamethasone 0.1% and does not elevate intraocular pressure. But in this study it can be seen clearly that by dexamethasone 0.1%) control of symptoms and signs was better than by medrysone 1.0% in cases of spring catarrh.
But still medrysone 1.0% was able to control symptoms as well as signs in large number of cases.
In cases of iritis medrysone 1.0% has shown much poorer response in comparison to dexamethasone 0.1%. We think that this poor response is due to poor ocular penetration.
| Summary|| |
Medrysone 1.0% is less potent - anti-inflammatory agent when compared to dexamethasone 0.1% but still it can be used in external ocular inflammation, like spring catarrh, atopic conjunctivitis etc. In intraocular inflammation it shows very poor response.
| References|| |
Bedrosian and Eriksen, 1969, Arch. Ophthalmol, 81 :184.
Dasch, W. and Thygeson, P, 1968, Amer. J. Ophthalmol, 65: 74.
[Table - 1], [Table - 2], [Table - 3], [Table - 4], [Table - 5]