PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Conjunctivitis, Allergic”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11Linked to original sources
PubMed1989

Contact lens intolerance; allergic conjunctivitis?

20 patients complaining of contact lens intolerance were patch tested to a contact lens solution and a contact lens components battery. Contact urticaria testing was also carried out. 8 patients had positive delayed reactions on patch testing, 6 patients had positive contact urticaria reactions, and 9 patients had no reactions. These results are discussed and possible alternative diagnoses for the 9 undiagnosed patients are proposed.

Conjunctivitis, Allergic↗
PubMed1994

Comparison of Naphcon-A and its components (naphazoline and pheniramine) in a provocative model of allergic conjunctivitis.

A double-masked, randomized, parallel group, placebo-controlled study demonstrated the efficacy of Naphcon-A (naphazoline HCl 0.025% and pheniramine maleate 0.3%). Seventy-two patients with a documented positive skin test or radioallergosorbent test were recruited. Three groups of 24 patients each received 1 drop of Naphcon-A instilled in one eye, and 1 drop of either naphazoline, pheniramine, or placebo in the other eye. After the instillation of test medication, a titrated dose of ragweed antigen was administered bilaterally, and ocular signs and symptoms were evaluated 10, 30, and 120 minutes later. All patients (excluding 4 who had persistent symptoms attributable to ragweed) were rechallenged with ragweed antigen at 120 minutes to assess the duration of action of the test medications. Naphcon-A was significantly more effective than placebo, naphazoline, and pheniramine in reducing redness. Naphcon-A and pheniramine were equally effective in relieving itching.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

[Tear eosinophil cationic protein measurement in patients with seasonal allergic conjunctivitis].

PURPOSE: In the patients with seasonal allergy conjunctivitis (SAC), we investigated the concentration of tear eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) levels, the diagnosis of SAC and the usefulness of studying the disease states. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The subjects were patients suffering from conjunctivitis seasonal allergy caused by cedar pollen and a healthy control group, and the study period was three years from 2001 to 2003. We divided the allergy group into 27 eyes of 27 patients that we measured before the pollen season and 44 SAC eyes of 44 patients that we measured during the pollen season. The healthy control group was 23 eyes of 23 healthy adults. Tears were collected by the schirmer I method. The ECP value of specimens was measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using samples which we eluted in buffer (0.5 M NaCl + 0.5% tris buffer saline with Tween 20) from Schirmer test paper. RESULTS: The measurement range of ELISA was 3.6-180 microg/l. The mean ECP value above the lower limit of ELISA in tears was 5.06 +/- 3.39 microg/l (n = 7) (mean +/- standard deviation) for the healthy control group, 9.32 +/- 6 .68 (n = 11) for the preseason group, and 54.90 +/- 117.74 (n = 29) for the pollen season group. The difference between the healthy group and the seasonal group was highly significant (p < 0.005), but there was no significant difference between the healthy group and the preseason group. We set the cut-off point at the 95th percentile (11.1 microg/l) of the healthy group and considered any value above cut-off as positive. The ECP value was positive in 2.5% (3 eyes out of 27) in the preseason group and 40.9% (18 of 44) in the seasonal group, and there was a significant difference (p < 0.01) between the seasonal group and the healthy group. When the seasonal group was divided into patients who had started treatment before the pollen season and those who began treatment during the season, we found a small ECP difference, but it was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Measurement of the ECP value in seasonal pollen allergy sufferers may be useful for pathological ascertainment, but it dose not provide adequate diagnosis because of the large number of false negative cases.

Adult↗