Abstract: Another literature-review type thing

Nothing particularly interesting in the abstract - literature review study, so the abstract is just generalizations. And quite frankly I'd be surprised if the list of "new applicable biological substances" is as exhaustive as what we have on DryEyeZone.

I like the highlighted comment, about no official guidelines replacing individual strategies, though I fear that in practice, there are 'unofficial' guidelines applied in most practices that tend to treat all dry eye patients alike regardless of what the real underlying problems are. (NPATS... Restasis... Lotemax... plugs. If that fails, then and only then do we consider something else. Sound familiar?)

Dev Ophthalmol. 2008;41:75-84.
Anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive concepts.
Nölle B

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Patients with symptomatic dry eyes are frequently seen by every ophthalmologist. Understanding of the plethora of factors involved in sicca syndrome is essential to substantially help the patient. Besides important and frequent topical treatment options, anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive systemic treatment concepts sometimes play an additional role.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Relevant data of publications listed in Medline between 1966 and 2006 are analyzed.

RESULTS: Local treatment options are listed, immunosuppressive substances are shortly characterized with regard to action, side effects, and control parameters. An overview of new applicable biological substances is given.

CONCLUSIONS: A variety of treatment options can be offered to patients with dry eyes. The spectrum ranges from lubricants to systemical immunosuppressive substances. At present no official guidelines replace individual strategies to treat the patient. An escalation of treatment options has to be performed with individual experience.