Levaquin and Other Fluoroquinolone Antibiotics Linked to Double Vision

Results of a new study suggest that fluoroquinolone antibiotics, such as Levaquin and Cipro, may cause double vision, in addition to the known side effects, like tendon ruptures and tendonitis.

Researchers from the Casey Eye Institute at Oregon Health and Science University in Portland looked at 171 people suffering from diplopia, or double vision, and found a link between the condition and the class of antibiotics known as fluoroquinolones, according to a study published in the September issue of Ophthalmology.

Fluoroquinolones are a class of antibiotic that includes Levaquin, Cipro, Proquin, Factive, Avelox, Noroxin and Floxin. They are used to prevent infection by stopping the reproduction of bacteria and are a popular class of medications.

Did You Know?

Millions of Philips CPAP Machines Recalled

Philips DreamStation, CPAP and BiPAP machines sold in recent years may pose a risk of cancer, lung damage and other injuries.

Learn More

The researchers gleaned data on people suffering from diplopia and also taking fluoroquinolone antibiotics from case reports in the National Registry of Drug-Induced Ocular Side Effects, the World Health Organization and the FDA. In 53 of the cases reviewed, use of the antibiotics was stopped and the double vision stopped as well. But in five of those cases, the antibiotic double vision problems returned when the patients started taking the drug again.

Information about the fluoroquinolone and Levaquin double vision side effects comes as lawsuits continue to mount against Johnson & Johnson and Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc., the makers of Levaquin, for failing to adequately warn about the risk of tendon ruptures and severe tendonitis associated with their drug.

In July 2008, the FDA required that a “black box” warning be added to all fluoroquinolone antibiotics indicating that they could increase the risk of tendon ruptures and tendon damage. Although the warning was added to all antibiotics in the class, lawsuits allege that the risk is greatest with Levaquin and that the manufacturer failed to properly research their drug or provide reasonable information about the risk that could have allowed users to avoid a tendon rupture by discontinuing the medication at the first signs of pain.

All of the federal Levaquin lawsuits have been consolidated into an MDL, or multidistrict litigation, which is centralized for pretrial litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. The first trial for a Levaquin lawsuit in the MDL is scheduled to begin in August 2010.

At this time, there are no known Levaquin double vision lawsuits pending in the multidistrict litigation.

1 Comments

  • CynthiaSeptember 12, 2014 at 2:32 am

    I've taken Cipro, Levaquin, Avelox, Lipitor and Prilosec and now find out these can be the cause of my nueropathy. How is this even possible in this great country, the US of A? Drug companies need to be held accountable for the hell they are putting people through and the FDA should stop coddling them and approving them based on the drug companies own tests. Example: Synthoid I used to ta[Show More]I've taken Cipro, Levaquin, Avelox, Lipitor and Prilosec and now find out these can be the cause of my nueropathy. How is this even possible in this great country, the US of A? Drug companies need to be held accountable for the hell they are putting people through and the FDA should stop coddling them and approving them based on the drug companies own tests. Example: Synthoid I used to take Darvon for migraines which has been around for 100 years, give or take a few and they removed it from the market because someone died. Many of my friends took it too for many, many years. Why now? Disgusted! PayOffs, PayOffs, PayOffs people!

Share Your Comments

I authorize the above comments be posted on this page*

Want your comments reviewed by a lawyer?

To have an attorney review your comments and contact you about a potential case, provide your contact information below. This will not be published.

NOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.