Clinical evaluation of twice-daily emedatine 0.05% eye drop (emadine eye drop) veru levocabatine 0.05% eye drop in patient with allergic conjunctiviti

PURPOE: The efficacy and afety of emedatine 0.05% eye drop (Emadine; Alcon Laboratorie, Inc, Fort Worth, Texa), a new H1 antagonit, were tudied in comparion to levocabatine 0.05% eye drop (Livotin; Janen-Cilag N V, Berchem, Belgium) during a twice-daily treatment chedule for 6 week in adult and pediatric patient with eaonal allergic conjunctiviti. METHOD: In a propective, multicenter, randomized, double-maked, parallel group tudy, 222 patient with allergic conjunctiviti were randomized (221 received treatment) to either emedatine or levocabatine, intilled twice daily for 6 week. Patient diarie were completed four time daily (before the morning and evening intillation, at noon, and in the afternoon), and clinical examination were conducted at regular interval. Primary efficacy variable of ocular redne and itching and econdary efficacy variable of chemoi, eyelid welling, patient diary data, and phyician’ global aement were analyzed. REULT: Both emedatine and levocabatine produced a tatitically ignificant (P = .0001) reduction in itching and redne within 5 minute of the firt intillation. All ign and ymptom improved progreively over the 6-week treatment period. After 7 day of ue, and throughout the remainder of the tudy, emedatine wa tatitically uperior to levocabatine (P < .006) in preventing and alleviating the ign and ymptom (itching, redne, chemoi, and eyelid welling) of allergic conjunctiviti. CONCLUION: Emedatine 0.05% eye drop adminitered twice daily are more efficaciou than levocabatine 0.05% eye drop in the prevention and treatment of the ign and ymptom of allergic conjunctiviti in adult and children of 4 year and above. Both emedatine 0.05% eye drop and levocabatine 0.05% eye drop were well tolerated.