Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Cyclosporine eye implants to treat dry eye in dogs
By Barachetti, Laura et al.·Published in Veterinary ophthalmology·2015·Department of Veterinary Science and Public Health, Italy·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Use of episcleral cyclosporine implants in dogs with keratoconjunctivitis sicca: pilot study.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of dogs with dry eye (keratoconjunctivitis sicca) received special silicone implants that slowly release cyclosporine, a medication that helps increase tear production. After the implants were placed, the dogs showed significant improvement in their tear production and overall eye health, with less redness, swelling, and discharge. Both dogs that responded well to previous treatments and those that did not saw benefits from the implants. The implants were generally well tolerated, although two dogs lost their devices during follow-up.
People also search for: dog dry eye treatment · cyclosporine implants for dogs · improving tear production in dogs
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe the use, tolerability, and efficacy of episcleral silicone matrix cyclosporine (ESMC) implants in dogs with keratoconjunctivitis sicca (KCS). METHODS: Retrospective study. ESMC implants (1.9 cm length, 30% wt/wt CsA in silicone; with approximately 12 mg of CsA loaded into them) were used in dogs with KCS responsive to topical CsA (good candidate, GC) or not responsive (poor candidate, PC). Ocular surface inflammation scores, Schirmer tear test (STT) values, and ocular discharge quantity were evaluated and compared. RESULTS: Twenty-seven eyes (15 dogs) received an ESMC implant for KCS; 15 eyes were considered GC, and 12 were considered PC. Both GC eyes and PC eyes showed a significant increase in STT values (increase of 7.7 and 8.5 mm/min; P = 0.023 and P = 0.003, respectively) after placement of ESMC implants (mean follow-up 18 ± 2 and 10.4 ± 15 months, respectively). Clinical signs improved significantly in both groups during the same follow-up, with reduction in conjunctival hyperemia (P < 0.001), corneal neovascularization (P = 0.004), corneal opacity (P = 0.003), and ocular discharge (P = 0.002). ESMC implants were well tolerated by all dogs, but two eyes lost the device at 12-months and 1-week follow-up, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study suggest that the EMSC implants were well tolerated and efficacious in dogs with KCS responsive to topical CsA as well as dogs with poor response to topical therapy. Further study is needed to determine the duration of efficacy and optimal dose of CsA.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24799029/