logo
Study: Dropless Cataract Surgery Slashes Drug Costs

Study: Dropless Cataract Surgery Slashes Drug Costs

Medscape20-05-2025
A regimen that spares patients recovering from cataract surgery the burden of using antibacterial and anti-inflammatory eye drops several times a day for weeks and instead uses an injection to administer those drugs immediately after the procedure is nearly as effective at preventing complications as the traditional drop regimen at a fraction of the cost, a study of both approaches found.
'Our study aims to underscore the benefits of the dropless cataract surgery approach as a promising alternative to the traditional drop regimen, particularly for populations where adherence to postoperative drops is challenging,' Yousef Yousef, a medical student at the University at Buffalo Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Buffalo, New York, told Medscape Medical News. 'We hope our findings will encourage broader adoption of the dropless protocol by cataract surgeons, potentially establishing it as a new standard of care.'
Yousef Yousef
Yousef presented results from a retrospective chart review of 544 eyes that had cataract surgery at the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO) 2025 Annual Meeting in Salt Lake City.
Dropless vs Traditional Protocol
The traditional protocol, used in 265 study eyes, consisted of giving patients a prescription for drops of the anti-inflammatory corticosteroid prednisolone 1%, the antibiotic moxifloxacin 0.5%, and the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory ketorolac 0.5% four times a day with a 4-week taper. The dropless protocol, assigned to 279 eyes, consisted of an intracameral injection of 0.2 mL of moxifloxacin 0.5% and a 10 mg/mL subconjunctival injection of the glucocorticoid triamcinolone (Kenalog) on completion of the operation.
The researchers found no significant differences in best-corrected visual acuity. Patients who had the dropless protocol had a higher incidence of cystoid macular edema — 5% vs 1% — Yousef said, but the incidence of ocular hypertension was not statistically significant between the two groups (2% vs 1%). A multivariate regression analysis showed the dropless protocol was not associated with increased risks for either complication, he added.
The dropless protocol has three key potential advantages over the traditional approach, Yousef said: Convenience for patients, improved drug bioavailability, and lower cost.
'The traditional drop protocol requires patients to administer three different medications four times daily over a 4-week tapering period,' he told Medscape Medical News . 'This regimen results in a total of 12 drops per day for one eye and 210 drops over the course of the taper.'
Poor drug bioavailability is a 'significant concern' with topical drops, Yousef said, because the epithelial membrane of the cornea can limit the ability of the drops from penetrating into the eye. 'Intracameral injection bypasses these barriers, delivering a more direct treatment,' he said.
A 2020 analysis of Medicare claims reported the average cost of medications for eye drops after cataract surgery was $228 per eye. 'Notably, 76.5% of this total cost was attributed to the use of brand-name medications,' Yousef said. 'In contrast, the dropless approach costs just $15.91 per eye when a single vial is used for approximately 10 cases.'
The new data are important because few randomized clinical trials have compared the dropless and traditional protocols for treating pain and inflammation and preventing infections after cataract surgery, according to Neal Shorstein, MD, a retired cataract surgeon with Kaiser Permanente in Northern California .
Neal Shorstein, MD
'There are an accumulating number of observational studies, so this adds to the retrospective, observational literature, and that's a good thing because different locations and practice environments add to the experience,' said Shorstein, an adviser to the Seva Foundation, a nonprofit group that develops eye care programs in underserved regions.
The doses of medication used in the dropless protocol in the analysis are higher than what others have reported. The 0.2 mL of intracameral moxifloxacin 0.5% is 'about the upper limits of what you want to inject of moxifloxacin.' The 0.5-mL dose of subconjunctival triamcinolone is, 'in my estimation, a good dose.'
The formulation of triamcinolone used has a large particle size, which 'matters a lot because the safety and effectiveness of triamcinolone depends on the particle size,' he said. Triesence, another formulation of triamcinolone used in some dropless protocols, has a smaller particle size, he said.
The entry point on the conjunctiva for the triamcinolone injection is another important factor, Shorstein added. 'Our findings show that 6-8 mm from the limbus is the optimal location,' he said.
The study was independently supported. Yousef and Shorstein reported having no relevant financial relationships.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

First PRIZM Study Participant Enrolled in Tisento Therapeutics' Open-Label Extension Study in MELAS
First PRIZM Study Participant Enrolled in Tisento Therapeutics' Open-Label Extension Study in MELAS

Yahoo

time10 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

First PRIZM Study Participant Enrolled in Tisento Therapeutics' Open-Label Extension Study in MELAS

Participants Who Complete Treatment in Global Phase 2b PRIZM MELAS Study Are Eligible to Enroll CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Aug. 20, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Tisento Therapeutics today announced that the first participant has enrolled in the company's open-label extension study in MELAS (Mitochondrial Encephalomyopathy, Lactic Acidosis, and Stroke-like Episodes). The extension study (NCT06961344) is evaluating the long-term safety and tolerability of zagociguat in individuals with MELAS who complete treatment in the global Phase 2b PRIZM study, which is expected to complete screening in the next months. The extension study is intended to provide uninterrupted access to zagociguat for clinical trial participants for up to two years and evaluate the long-term safety of zagociguat. 'We're pleased to reach the important milestone of enrolling the first PRIZM study participant into our open-label extension study,' said Peter Hecht, Ph.D., chief executive officer of Tisento. 'Enthusiastic engagement by MELAS patients and physicians is powering momentum in our development program, and we look forward to completing PRIZM enrollment in the next few months.' The PRIZM study is actively enrolling in the U.S., Canada, Australia, United Kingdom, Italy, and Germany, and interested individuals are encouraged to discuss participation with their physician. PRIZM is evaluating the impact of zagociguat treatment on fatigue, cognitive performance, and other key aspects of MELAS. The clinical outcome assessments and endpoint strategy for the PRIZM study were informed by Tisento's interview study in which individuals living with MELAS described the symptoms and impacts of the disease that are most important to them. Participants who complete treatment in PRIZM have the opportunity to enroll in the open-label extension study. About the PRIZM Study PRIZM – a Phase 2b Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial Investigating Zagociguat in MELAS – is evaluating the efficacy and safety of oral zagociguat 15 mg or 30 mg compared to placebo when administered once-daily for 12 weeks in participants with genetically and phenotypically defined MELAS. The PRIZM study has a crossover design, with two 12-week treatment periods separated by a 4-week washout period. All participants will receive zagociguat during one of the 12-week periods and placebo during the other. Participants who complete treatment in the study have the opportunity to enroll in an open-label extension study. The global PRIZM study is now enrolling approximately 44 participants at mitochondrial disease centers of excellence in the U.S., Italy, Germany, United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada. For more information, please visit or (NCT06402123). Interested individuals can also reach out to their physicians for participation details. About Zagociguat Zagociguat is a once-daily, oral, clinical-stage investigational medicine with potential to positively impact both peripheral and central nervous system manifestations of mitochondrial diseases. Zagociguat stimulates soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC), an enzyme that is found in virtually every cell in every tissue of the body and is part of a system of cellular mechanisms that control critical physiological functions including neuronal function and blood flow. A first-in-class, brain-penetrant sGC stimulator, zagociguat is hypothesized to rebalance dysregulated cellular pathways in MELAS. By restoring cellular functions that support mitochondria, zagociguat may help restore mitochondrial energy production and physiological function. In a Phase 2a study in patients with MELAS, zagociguat exhibited a favorable safety profile, exposure throughout the body including in the central nervous system, and improvements in neuronal function, mitochondrial function, and blood flow in the brain. Zagociguat is currently being evaluated as a treatment for MELAS in the Phase 2b PRIZM study. Zagociguat received Fast Track designation from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of MELAS. Fast Track is a process designed to facilitate the development and potentially expedite the review of medicines to treat serious conditions and fill an unmet medical need, with the goal of getting important new drugs to patients earlier. For more information, visit About Tisento Therapeutics Tisento Therapeutics, a privately held biotech company, is developing novel medicines to treat diseases with significant unmet need, beginning with MELAS and other genetic mitochondrial diseases. Ti sento means 'I hear you' in Italian; our approach to innovation begins with listening to patients and then channeling what we learn into decisive actions that shape our research and clinical programs. Tisento is guided by a high-caliber internal team of biopharma veterans and an extensive external network of expert physicians, patient advocacy groups, researchers, industry-leading vendors, and other close collaborators who are partners in our mission to develop meaningful treatments for mitochondrial diseases. Learn more at our website, or connect with us on LinkedIn, Facebook, X (@tisentotx), or Bluesky. Contact Tisento Media RelationsJessi Rennekamp, Astrior CommunicationsEmail: jessi@ in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

This Advice From Economics Might Be The Answer To Your Parenting Burnout. Here's Why.
This Advice From Economics Might Be The Answer To Your Parenting Burnout. Here's Why.

Yahoo

time10 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

This Advice From Economics Might Be The Answer To Your Parenting Burnout. Here's Why.

When my wife and I brought our first child home from the hospital, we planned on diligently following all of the expert recommendations regarding his care: He would breastfeed exclusively and sleep in a bassinet beside our bed, on his back, in a properly ventilated room. We had read about SIDS and would take every possible precaution. What could be more important that preventing harm from coming to our child? Almost immediately, however, we ran into trouble. Our baby stopped peeing. He was dehydrated and hungry, somehow, although he spent pretty much all day at my breast. So we feed him some infant formula using a medicine dropper, which he lapped up hungrily, sending me into a shame spiral that took months of therapy to crawl out of. But at least with the supplementary formula we were able to keep him happily fed. Related: The second problem sent us into a territory that was even more mortifying. In spite of the fact that my breasts were only partially functional, the baby was extremely attached to them. As in, he would only sleep if they were right there, right beside him, skin to skin with his tiny cheek. Every time he feel asleep while nursing and unlatched his little rosebud lips, I moved as stealthily as possible to try to get him into the bassinet. But more often than not, he woke and started crying. And even if I could get him to lie in the bassinet, it often didn't last long. The end result was that I spent a lot of time nursing him in the chair, and, in my desperation and exhaustion, I often fell asleep. My wife could tell, just by looking at us, that this was not a safe situation. Since it wasn't possible to get him into the bassinet, we just cleared our bed of blankets and pillows and let him sleep where he wanted to, right next to my body. We didn't tell anyone. We had been taught that bed-sharing with a baby was deadly, so we certainly weren't going to admit to doing it. This was all back in 2009, before economist Emily Oster began publishing her bestselling books, in which she brings a unique, data-driven perspective to the art of parenting. In her second book, 'Cribsheet,' she explains how holding up the ideal infant sleeping arrangement as the only permissible option can actually lead parents to put their babies in more danger. Because although it is safest to have baby sleep on a separate surface, it is much more dangerous to sleep with a baby on a sofa or armchair. Sixty-seven times more dangerous. Though it wasn't a best-case scenario that the baby wasn't in the bassinet, he was a lot safer sleeping next to me on the mattress instead of in the recliner. Infant sleep, Oster writes, is one example of a scenario in which we might benefit from considering what she calls 'second best' parenting. It is a term she borrows from economics. 'When we are giving advice in parenting, we tend to be absolutist: There is the best option and then everything else,' Oster told HuffPost, She has used the term 'outer darkness' to refer to everything else — as in, if it's not the best option, it's all equally bad and scary. But this all-or-nothing approach doesn't apply well to infant sleep, where we clearly have a first best option (bassinet/crib in same room as parent) followed by a second best option (on a clear, flat sleeping surface next to the nursing parent) and then, way, way down, the 67th best option of a desperate mother accidentally falling asleep in an armchair while holding the baby because she has been told that under no circumstances should she consider bringing the baby into her bed. 'The idea of 'second best' is to recognize that within the category of 'other options,' some are better than others. The second best is the best option that we can achieve,' Oster said. She thinks that this can be a useful framework for other parenting choices, too, such as what to feed our children. 'We're told the best snack for our kids is, say, a whole apple and a glass of water. But what if your kid doesn't eat that? We don't help people pick well among the options their child will eat. You'd be forgiven for thinking that once you're going to applesauce, you might as well give a pile of cookies. But actually those aren't the same.' Believing that there is only one right way and the rest are wrong sets us up to see only black and white when actually there are so many shades of gray. 'When we tell people that it's the 'best or the rest,' we do not allow for them to choose smartly among the rest,' Oster said. In addition to not choosing well, this thinking makes people feel badly about how they're parenting. 'When we tell people they aren't doing their best, that disempowers them. And no one parents well from a place of shame,' Oster added. Finding Other Good Options Beyond Perfect The advantage of referring to 'second best' is that, with the word 'best,' parents are left with space to take pride in their parenting. A silver or bronze medal is still a win, after all. The argument that Oster is making is similar to that of 'good enough parenting,' an idea popularized in the 1950s by Donald Winnicott. Parenting coach Kristene Geering told HuffPost that this is the framework she uses with parents. 'It's based on the notion that there is no such thing as perfect,' Geering explained. 'Part of being human is that there are challenges, there are times when there's no clear or easy path (which is also how we learn). There is no 'best.' You take what information you have, make a decision based on that and then you learn as you go along.' Geering thinks this dovetails nicely with Carol Dweck's 'growth mindset,' in which as we learn more, we do better. Geering said she often tells families that 'we're all doing the best we can with what we have' and advises, 'Learn from your mistakes, repair as you go, and show your children how to hold compassion for yourself and those around you.' She likes the 'good enough' phrasing because it makes room for the idea that there are many different options that might be 'bests' for different families dealing with different circumstances. Geering agrees with Oster that it's important to move parents out the space of 'all is lost,' where they may get trapped in their shame. She said that where she works in Silicon Valley, 'I see a lot of parents fall into this trap of trying to be 'perfect' ... and then researching themselves into a state where they're almost frozen with indecision.' With an endless amount of information readily available, this isn't an uncommon place for parents to land. 'I've fallen into this trap as well,' Geering admitted. 'Things like which school to attend, which activity to sign up for... it's really overwhelming.' Make Peace With Your 'Good Enough' Using a 'second best' or 'good enough' mindset doesn't come naturally to people raised in a culture of competition. But sooner or later, all parents are faced with a scenario that challenges expectations of perfection. For Geering, a clear example of this in her own family was pandemic schooling. 'I watched my own kids struggle on 'Zoom school,' to the point where it was clear this would never work for them. So I pulled them, and we did homeschool for a year... while my husband and I both worked full time. Was it perfect? Nope. Was it 'second best'? I have no idea.' Her kids are 'still catching up on math,' she said, although they also 'gained a lot of skills in independence.' 'Instead of beating myself up on all the math they missed out on, I looked at it from the point of view that I was doing the best I could in really awful circumstances. And I looked at all the moms in my friend groups and the parents I was working with, and I saw everyone making different decisions, based on their specific circumstances. Absolutely no one did the 'best' thing... because there was no 'best' thing.' Whether you think of it as 'second best' or 'good enough,' parenting within this framework, as opposed to one in which there is only one right option for all families, makes room for you to give yourself some grace. An added benefit of letting go of a perfection-or-nothing mindset is the weight that this takes off of our kids. If we 'show them how to repair the relationship when we mess up and share our learning process with them,' Geering said, 'it lets them be compassionate with themselves, learn from their mistakes, create authentic and meaningful relationships with others, and have a growth mindset as their default throughout life. That's pretty powerful stuff.' Related... Parents Are Lying About Where Their Babies Sleep At Night. Here's Why That's A Problem. What Second-Time Parents Wish They Didn't Stress About The First Time Around This 1 Thing May Be Wearing Parents Out Everywhere

AAP Counters ACIP Guidance in New Immunization Schedule
AAP Counters ACIP Guidance in New Immunization Schedule

Medscape

time11 minutes ago

  • Medscape

AAP Counters ACIP Guidance in New Immunization Schedule

America's leading professional pediatric association has released its latest immunization schedule, contravening current federal COVID-19 immunization guidance. The immunization schedule was published on August 19 in the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)'s Redbook Online and calls for universal COVID-19 immunization beginning at 6 months. It also includes the group's formal recommendations for routine infant, children, and adolescent immunizations against 18 diseases. There are also updated recommendations for respiratory syncytial virus and influenza. 'We extensively reviewed the most recently available data about COVID-19 risks in kids, as well as safety and effectiveness of available COVID-19 vaccines. It's clear they are very safe for all populations,' Sean O'Leary, MD, chair of the AAP Committee on Infectious Diseases, said in a statement. In May of this year, Health and Human Services Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr, announced in a video posted on X, that the CDC had dropped Biden era recommendations that all pregnant women and children be given the COVID-19 vaccine. The video came on the heels of the CDC's announcement that only 13% of eligible children were up to date on their COVID-19 vaccine. In children aged 6 months to 23 months, that number was about 5%. 'Evidence-Based' vs 'Conflict of Interest' The AAP said its COVID-19 recommendations are 'evidence-based' and that they 'differ from recent recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the CDC, which was overhauled this year and replaced with individuals who have a history of spreading vaccine misinformation.' Kennedy's office shot back that the AAP is not acting in good faith. 'By bypassing the CDC's advisory process and freelancing its own recommendations, while smearing those who demand accountability, the AAP is putting commercial interests ahead of public health and politics above America's children,' Kennedy's Communications Director, Andrew Simpson, said in a statement provided to Medscape Medical News . Kennedy's office continued, 'The American people deserve confidence that medical recommendations are based solely on science and public health. We call on the AAP to strengthen conflict-of-interest safeguards and keep its publications free from financial influence, ensuring every recommendation reflects only the best interests of America's children.' COVID-19 The Academy noted that because it can be fatal in children, especially those aged 6 months through 23 months; it recommends a COVID-19 vaccine for this patient population, unless they have a known allergy to the ingredients of the vaccine. An age-appropriate COVID-19 vaccine is recommended for all children and adolescents 2 through 18 years of age in the following risk groups: Persons at high risk for severe COVID-19 Residents of long-term care facilities or other congregate settings Persons who have never been vaccinated against COVID-19 Persons whose household contacts are at high risk for severe COVID-19 The most updated version of the vaccine should be made available to any parent or guardian who desires their child to be protected against COVID-19, according to the Academy's recommendations. The AAP's COVID-19 vaccine guidelines are published online and will be published in the November issue of Pediatrics . 'Among the reasons we decided to move to a risk-based recommendation for healthy older children is the fact that the hospitalization rate for young children and children underlying medical conditions remains high, in line with rates for many of the other vaccine-preventable diseases for which we vaccinate,' O'Leary said. Federal recommendations state that the COVID-19 shot is not universally recommended, but that physicians take a case-by-case approach in pediatric cases. Adults aged 18 years or older are still advised to receive the vaccine under this administration. 'Rooted in Science' The AAP's other vaccine recommendations largely mirror those of ACIP. The new schedule also addresses recent updates on pentavalent meningococcal vaccine, the starting age of the human papilloma virus vaccine, and the removal of a hepatitis vaccine that is no longer available, according to the statement. 'The AAP will continue to provide recommendations for immunizations that are rooted in science and are in the best interest of the health of infants, children, and adolescents,' AAP President Susan J. Kressly, MD, said in the statement. 'Pediatricians know how important routine childhood immunizations are in keeping children, families, and their communities healthy and thriving.' Insurance Coverage in Question Insurance coverage for vaccinations is normally based on federal recommendations. Now that there is a schism in recommendations, coverage is in question. 'The AAP urges every insurer to cover all the vaccines that are included in this immunization schedule,' Kressly said in the statement. 'AAP is committed to working with our partners at the local, state, and federal levels to make sure every child, in every community, has access to vaccines.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store