Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 2, 2025
Author Spotlight: Exploring Corneal Innate Immunity and Delayed Wound Healing in Diabetic Patients
Published on: January 10, 2025
Topical 0.1% Nepafenac versus 0.09% Bromfenac Eye Drops for Inflammation after Laser Peripheral Iridotomy: A
Lavanya G Shankar1, Annamalai Odayappan1, Aakriti Garg Shukla2
1Department of Glaucoma, Aravind Eye Hospital, Pondicherry, India.
Purpose:
To assess the safety and efficacy of 0.1% nepafenac versus 0.09% bromfenac eye drops in controlling inflammation after neodymium yttrium-aluminum-garnet (YAG) laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI).
Design:
Single-masked, single-center, randomized controlled trial.
Participants:
One hundred and sixty eyes of patients with primary angle-closure suspect (PACS) and primary angle closure (PAC) undergoing bilateral LPI.
Methods:
Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive 0.1% nepafenac thrice daily or 0.09% bromfenac eye drops twice daily for 2 weeks after neodymium YAG LPI. Assessment was performed by masked investigators at 2 weeks after LPI. A Glaucoma Symptom Scale (GSS) questionnaire was administered both at baseline and 2 weeks after LPI. Subjective comfort scores to the study medications were assessed on the basis of a Likert scale at 2 weeks after LPI. In patients with bilateral PACS or PAC, the right eye was analyzed, and in asymmetrical disease (i.e., when one eye had PACS and the other eye had PAC), the eye with PAC was analyzed.
Main Outcome Measures:
The primary outcome (end point) was uncontrolled inflammation, defined as symptomatic inflammation within 1 week after LPI, the presence of anterior chamber cells at 2 weeks, or rebound inflammation after medication discontinuation. The secondary outcome was patient-reported comfort levels with study medications based on the GSS and Likert scale.
Results:
At 2 weeks after LPI, 7 patients (6 with PACS and 1 with PAC) in the nepafenac group and 2 patients with PACS in the bromfenac group achieved the primary end point, without a difference between the medication groups (P = 0.09). Post-LPI burning, smarting, and stinging was more common in the bromfenac group (P = 0.01), which also had a higher comfort score on the Likert scale (P = 0.004). The need for repeat LPI was comparable (10.0% in the nepafenac group vs. 15.4% in the bromfenac group; P = 0.22). A multivariate analysis revealed that a greater number of laser shots was associated with the need for repeat LPI (odds ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.10; P = 0.04).
Conclusions:
Topical 0.09% bromfenac is noninferior to 0.1% nepafenac in controlling inflammation after LPI in eyes with PACS and PAC. Nepafenac may be associated with higher patient-reported comfort.
