A randomized paralled double-masked prospective clinical trial published in the May 2006 Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, found that Restasis (cyclosporine 0.5%) had no effect on 21 dry eye post-op LASIK patients (42 eyes), as indicated by the Ocular Surface Disease Index Questionaire, nor were there changes in best corrected visual acuity in the LASIK post-op dry eyes treated with Restasis vs. those treated with unpreserved aritifcial tears.
The study reported that mean refractive spherical equivalent in cyclosporine-treated eyes was significantly closer to the intended target at 3 and 6 months after surgery than in artificial-tears-treated eyes. The reported P value of this hypothesis was .007.
In spite of the above evidence, the study authors conclusion was, "Restasis provides refractive predictability for the dry eye patient 3 and 6 months after surgery. "
This questionable conclusion seems to be based on an unidentified (key word) precentage of cyclosporine eyes that was within +/- 0.5 D of the refractive target 3 months after surgery compared to the artificial tears treated eyes.
An obvious question: Could the conclusion be a bit of a stretch given that the p value was not all that significient, and the study did not have a control, so maybe neither Restasis or unpreserved dry eye drops make much difference compared to no therapy.