Parkhomenko Oleg

Membership in Ukrainian and international associations: official representative of the European Society of Ophthalmology (SOE) in Ukraine; Chair of the Board of the NGO “Society of Young Ophthalmologists of Ukraine”; member of the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO); member of the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons (ESCRS); member of the Ukrainian Glaucoma Society; member of the Ukrainian Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons (USCRS); member of the Ukrainian Vitreoretinal Society (UVRS).

Professional activity: medical retina specialist, laser surgery, cataract surgery, glaucoma surgery.

From 2006 to 2016 worked at the Scientific and Practical Center “Laser Treatment Methods of the Eye” of Kyiv City Clinical Ophthalmology Hospital “Eye Microsurgery Center”.

From 2006 to 2025 worked at ophthalmological clinic “New Vision”, “Excimer”.

From 2015 till present time works at the Central Polyclinic of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine, Kyiv.

EDUCATION

Education: higher medical education in “General Medicine”, Bogomolets National Medical University (2005).

Qualifications: highest qualification category in “Ophthalmology”; specialization in “Health Care Organization and Management”; specialization in “Pediatric Ophthalmology” (2022); Master’s degree in Public Administration (2022). Total work experience: 20 years. Work experience in ophthalmology: 19 years.

Academic degree: PhD in Medical Sciences (2016).

RESEARCH, TEACHING, or OTHER INTERESTS

Ophthalmology, Education

Scopus Publications

Feasibility of teleguided training of retinal laser photocoagulation to optimize education of ophthalmology residents
Martin Ziegler, Ulrike Rahn, Oleg Parkhomenko, Igor Kozak
Graefe S Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 2025
Modern antiseptics against multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa, emerging from war-related injuries in Ukraine
Oleksandr Nazarchuk, Kristian Riesbeck, Valentyn Kovalchuk, Tetiana Denysko, Mariia Faustova, et al.
Frontiers in Microbiology, 2025
Susceptibility testing of clinical multidrug-resistant (MDR) and reference P. aeruginosa strains was performed using the standard twofold serial dilution method. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) of antiseptics were determined. MIC and MBC values were also interpreted as the bacteriostatic index of antiseptic activity (BSIAA) and the bactericidal index of antiseptic activity (BCIAA). The ability of strains to form biofilms, the inhibition of biofilm formation, and the destruction of mature biofilms under the influence of bacteriostatic, bactericidal, and ½ of the initial antiseptic concentration were modeled using Christensen’s test. Antiseptics from the detergent group, decamethoxine (0.1 and 0.02%) and polyhexanide (0.1%), demonstrated the highest antimicrobial activity. Their bacteriostatic concentrations were 63.2 ± 5.2 μg/mL and 68.7 ± 4.2 μg/mL, respectively. The ranking of antiseptics by bacteriostatic efficacy was: decamethoxine &gt; polyhexanide &gt; octenidine &gt; miramistin &gt; chlorhexidine. The highest BSIAA values were observed for povidone-iodine 10%, decamethoxine 0.1%, octenidine 0.1%, and polyhexanide 0.1%. The highest bactericidal IAA values were found for povidone-iodine 10%, decamethoxine 0.1%, octenidine 0.1%, and polyhexanide 0.1%. Miramistin 0.01% was deemed insufficiently effective. Polyhexanide exhibited the highest bactericidal activity, with a BCIAA to BSIAA ratio of 0.88. For all other antiseptics, this ratio ranged from 0.5 to 0.6. All tested strains exhibited a high capacity for biofilm formation. All antiseptics significantly inhibited biofilm formation. Octenidine had the strongest effect on immature biofilms, reducing their formation by 28.5% ( p &lt; 0.0001). The MICs of most antiseptics stimulated mature biofilm development. The bacteriostatic concentration of octenidine led to the eradication of biofilm by 4.7% ( p &lt; 0.001) compared to the control. The MBC of most antiseptics (except chlorhexidine) eradicated mature biofilms by 4–30.6%, whereas chlorhexidine stimulated mature biofilm growth by 17.9%. All antiseptics, at half their initial concentration, partially eradicated MDR Pseudomonas biofilms by 11.3–42.4%. Analysing the effect of octenidine at different concentrations and stages of biofilm formation highlights its strong activity against P. aeruginosa biofilms. Our findings underscore the importance of carefully monitoring P. aeruginosa isolates for antiseptic susceptibility. This approach can help prevent the development of selective conditions that promote resistant microorganisms and limit their spread.
Adjunctive use of tafluprost with timolol provides additive effects for reduction of intraocular pressure in patients with glaucoma
Evgeny Egorov, Auli Ropo, Evgeny Egorov, Valery Erichev, Yury Astakhov, et al.
European Journal of Ophthalmology, 2009
Purpose This study investigated the efficacy and safety of tafluprost as an adjunctive therapy to timolol in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension, uncontrolled by timolol monotherapy. Methods This was a randomized, double-masked, parallel-group, multinational and multicenter 12-week phase III study. Tafluprost 0.0015% (once daily: 20:10) or vehicle were administered as adjunctive therapy to timolol 0.5% (twice daily: 08:00 and 20:00) for 6 weeks, after which all patients received tafluprost for 6 weeks. Intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements were conducted at 08:00, 10:00, and 16:00 at baseline, and weeks 2, 4, 6, and 12. Results A total of 185 patients were randomized to tafluprost (n = 96) or vehicle (n = 89). Reductions in IOP were seen in both groups, which were consistently more pronounced with tafluprost. At week 6, the change from baseline in diurnal IOP ranged from −5.49 to −5.82 mm Hg, and the overall treatment difference (tafluprost vehicle) was −1.49 mmHg (upper 95% confidence interval, −0.66; p<0.001, intention-to-treat population, repeated measurements of the analysis of covariance model). At week 12, the change from baseline ranged from −6.22 to −6.79 mmHg in the tafluprost group. Patients switched from vehicle to tafluprost achieved a similar decrease in IOP to those who received tafluprost throughout the study (group difference at 12 weeks, −0.09 mmHg, p=0.812). There were more ocular adverse events with tafluprost compared with vehicle (42% vs. 29%, respectively), but most were mild in severity. Conclusions As adjunctive therapy to timolol, tafluprost achieved a consistently greater reduction in IOP compared with vehicle, and was well tolerated.