Disodium edetate 0.4% ophthalmic solution
Requires a prescription from a doctor or prescriber
Official documents, adverse reaction reporting, and safety monitoring
Report a side effect
Submit a Yellow Card report to the MHRA
Official medicine documents
Safety monitoring data
Yellow Card reports
The MHRA Yellow Card scheme collects reports of suspected side effects from healthcare professionals and patients. View the Drug Analysis Profile (iDAP) for real-world adverse reaction data.
View Drug Analysis Profile
Browse all Drug Analysis Profiles A–Z
Browse all iDAP reports
Interactive Drug Analysis Profiles for all medicines
Report a side effect
Submit a Yellow Card report to the MHRA
Data from the MHRA Yellow Card scheme. A reported reaction does not necessarily mean the medicine caused it. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
EudraVigilance
The European Medicines Agency (EMA) collects suspected adverse reaction reports from across the EU/EEA through the EudraVigilance system. Search for safety data on this medicine.
Search EudraVigilance database
Browse substances A–Z in the European adverse reaction database
About EudraVigilance
Learn about EU pharmacovigilance and safety monitoring
EudraVigilance data is published by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). A suspected adverse reaction is not necessarily caused by the medicine.
1 branded products available
Therapeutically similar medicines
Similarity is based on WHO Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification and on a factual NHS dm+d therapeutic-grouping code prefix. Source data: NHS dm+d via TRUD (OGL v3.0), WHO ATC/DDD Index.
Check stock at pharmacies and supply information
Pharmacy stock checkers
Search for this medicine at major UK pharmacy chains. These links open the retailer's own website — results depend on their current online catalogue.
Supply & safety information
Official UK regulator monitoring and safety alerts
Pharmacy links redirect to the retailer's own search and do not represent real-time stock levels. Shortage and safety information sourced from MHRA drug safety updates (gov.uk, Crown Copyright under OGL v3.0).
Codes for healthcare professionals and prescribing systems
These codes are used by healthcare IT systems and prescribers to identify this medicine.
NHS UK identifiers
Browse tools
SNOMED CT and dm+d codes from NHS TRUD (Technology Reference data Update Distribution), licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. BNF code shown is the factual mapping value distributed by NHS Business Services Authority (NHSBSA) in the dm+d supplementary file under OGL v3.0; it is not affiliated with, nor licensed from, the publishers of the British National Formulary. ATC codes from the WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology (whocc.no).
Active and completed clinical studies from ClinicalTrials.gov
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), National Institutes of Health (NIH). Data accessed via ClinicalTrials.gov API v2. Trial information is provided for research purposes and does not constitute medical advice.
Academic studies and reviews for this medicine's active substance
Showing the 50 most relevant studies.
Reviews & meta-analyses: 1 · Randomised trials: 1 · Trials: 6 · 1970–2026
Showing the 50 most relevant studies, sorted by most relevant.
Ujueta F, Lamas GA, Anstrom KJ, et al.
2025
- Myocardial Infarction
- Diabetes Mellitus
- Vitamins
ImportanceIn 2013, the Trial to Assess Chelation Therapy (TACT) reported that in 1708 patients with stable coronary disease and prior myocardial infarction (MI), oral multivitamins and multiminerals (OMVMs), in a factorial design with edetate disodium (EDTA) chelation therapy, did not reduce cardiovascular events relative to placebo OMVMs, but active EDTA combined with active OMVMs was superior to placebo OMVM/placebo EDTA.ObjectiveTo compare OMVM vs placebo in terms of efficacy for reducing major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with diabetes and prior MI.Design, setting, and participantsThe TACT2 randomized, multicenter double-masked 2 × 2 factorial clinical trial took place across 88 sites in the US and Canada. Participants were 50 years or older, had diabetes, and had an MI 6 weeks ago or more. TACT2 participants were enrolled between September 2016 and December 2020. Data were collected between October 2016 and June 2023.InterventionsSix caplets daily of a 28 component OMVM or matching OMVM placebo, and 40 weekly infusions of an EDTA-based chelation solution or matching placebo, in a 1:1:1:1 allocation ratio.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was the composite of all-cause mortality, MI, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina.ResultsA total of 1000 participants were randomized (500 in the active OMVM group and 500 in the placebo group). The median (IQR) age was 67 (60-72) years, and 730 (73%) were male. Median (IQR) follow-up was 48 (34-58) months. The primary end point occurred in 175 participants (35%) in the active OMVM group and 175 (35%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.99 [95% CI, 0.80-1.22]; P = .92). The 5-year event rate for the primary end point in the EDTA chelation + active OMVM group was 34.0%; in the EDTA chelation + placebo OMVM group, 35.7%; in the placebo infusion + active OMVM group, 36.0%; and in the placebo infusion + placebo OMVM group, 34.3%. The comparison of the active infusion + active OMVM with the placebo infusion + placebo OMVM was not significant (HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.67-1.23]; P = .54). Although nonsignificant, there was a numerically higher event rate of MI, stroke, mortality from cardiovascular causes in the active OMVM compared to placebo OMVM group.Conclusions and relevanceThe results of this randomized clinical trial demonstrated that, for participants with chronic coronary disease, diabetes, and a previous MI, high-dose OMVM alone or in conjunction with EDTA-based chelation did not reduce cardiovascular events.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02733185.
Abstract licence: CC BY
Sally Bradberry, Allister Vale
Clinical Toxicology, 2009
- Antidotes
- Chelating Agents
- Clinical Trials as Topic
S. Flora, Rahul Bhattacharya, R. Vijayaraghavan
Fundamental and applied toxicology : official journal of the Society of Toxicology, 1995
- Alkaline Phosphatase
- Transaminases
- Brain Chemistry
Mary Jean Brown, Teresa Willis, Bennet Omalu, et al.
PEDIATRICS, 2006
- Autistic Disorder
- Calcium
- Chelating Agents
Ye Wang, Zhipeng You, Sanlve Pei, et al.
Journal of Magnesium and Alloys, 2023
Gervasio A. Lamas, Kevin J. Anstrom, Ana Navas‐Acién, et al.
JAMA, 2024
- Chelating Agents
- Edetic Acid
- Angina, Unstable
Fan Yang, Shuqi Liu, Zhonghuan Tian, et al.
Postharvest Biology and Technology, 2023
Primas N, Lano G, Brun D, et al.
2023
Parenteral N-acetylcysteine has a wide variety of clinical applications, but its use can be limited by a poor chemical stability. We managed to control parenteral N-acetylcysteine stability, and to study the influence of additives on the decrease of N-acetylcysteine degradation. First, an HPLC-UV dosing method of N-acetylcysteine and its main degradation product, a dimer, was validated and the stability without additive was studied. Then, the influence of several additives (ascorbic acid, sodium edetate, tocopherol and zinc) and of temperature on N-acetylcysteine dimerization was evaluated. Finally, the influence of zinc gluconate at different concentrations (administrable to patients) was investigated. Zinc gluconate at 62.5 µg·mL-1 allows the stabilization of 25 mg·mL-1 N-acetylcysteine solution for at least 8 days when stored at 5 ± 3 °C.
Abstract licence: CC BY
A. Al-Wasidi, Samar M. Mahgoub, Mostafa E. Salem, et al.
Microchemical Journal, 2026
Anna Siemińska, Katarzyna Kot, Ewa Marek, et al.
Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2025
Background/Objectives: The objective of this in vitro study was to compare and evaluate the in vitro antimicrobial effectiveness of Endosal, Octenisolv, and Endoxal against intracanal Enterococcus faecalis. Methods: The study sample consisted of 84 extracted single-rooted human teeth, which were divided into seven groups (12 roots in each group): Group 1—Endoxal, Group 2—Octenisolv, Group 3—Endosal, Group 4—15% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), Group 5—2% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), Group 6—0.9% sterile saline solution (NaCl), and one positive control group where no irrigant was used. The roots were sterilized within an autoclave for 30 min at 121 °C and then contaminated with E. faecalis bacteria, after instrumentation and removing the smear layer from canals. The root canals were irrigated using a side-vented needle, and then ISO size 40 H-file was used to obtain fine dentine chips. Aliquots taken from the canals were plated on blood agar broth and the plates were incubated for 36 h. Results: In this study, significant differences were observed between the antimicrobial activity of Endoxal, Octenisolv, Endosal, 2% NaOCl, and sterile saline solution. Conclusions: The compound irrigants Endosal, Endoxal, and a novel irrigant containing disodium edetate and octenidine, which were evaluated in this study, exhibited relatively good antimicrobial properties against Enterococcus faecalis. The use of Endosal, Octenisolv or Endoxal appears promising, yet their clinical efficacy remains to be confirmed through further studies.
Abstract licence: CC BY 4.0
Sources: aggregated from Europe PMC (EMBL-EBI), OpenAlex, Crossref, PubMed and other open scholarly databases. Retracted articles are excluded. Study information is provided for research purposes and does not constitute medical advice.
Structured knowledge from the free knowledge base
ATC classifications (Wikidata)
Linked open data from Wikidata (Q27284152), a free and open knowledge base operated by the Wikimedia Foundation. Data is available under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication.
Scientific data (pharmacology, interactions, ADME) is not yet available for this medicine. Clinical sections are sourced from the NHS dm+d database.