Deposits and symptomatology with soft contact lens wear

Brennan, Noel A.; Coles, M.-L. Chantal

doi:10.1016/s0892-8967(01)00060-8

Cited by 54 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 111 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This discomfort, particularly at the end of the day, is thought to stem from a variety of sources including poor tear film quality resulting in symptoms of dryness [1], or problems associated with protein fouling [2][3][4]. Protein deposition is of particular interest, since the deposition of proteins and also potentially lipids from the tear fluid onto contact lenses causes a variety of adverse effects, including reduced vision, reduced wettability, inflammatory complications and reduced comfort [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Protein deposition is of particular interest, since the deposition of proteins and also potentially lipids from the tear fluid onto contact lenses causes a variety of adverse effects, including reduced vision, reduced wettability, inflammatory complications and reduced comfort [2]. An estimated 30% of all after-care visits by contact lens wearers to optometrists are reported to be due to contact lens deposition [3]. Therefore, it is desirable to reduce protein fouling of contact lens materials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hyaluronic acid containing hydrogels for the reduction of protein adsorption

Beek¹,

Jones²,

Sheardown³

2008

Biomaterials

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hyaluronic acid containing hydrogels for the reduction of protein adsorption

Beek¹,

Jones²,

Sheardown³

2008

Biomaterials

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…[1][2][3][4] Human tears are composed of a wide variety of proteins, lipids, and mucins, many of which may be adsorbed by the contact lens surface. [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] These deposits can result in discomfort, 16 -18 reduced visual acuity, 19 and giant papillary conjunctivitis (GPC). 20 Lysozyme represents a significant proportion of the total protein found in tears and is the major protein deposited on Food and Drug Administration (FDA) group IV contact lenses.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantity and Conformation of Lysozyme Deposited on Conventional and Silicone Hydrogel Contact Lens Materials Using an In Vitro Model

Suwala

Glasier

Subbaraman

et al. 2007

Eye &Amp; Contact Lens: Science &Amp; Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This hydrophobic staining technique may be useful for determining differences in the surface modification techniques and lipophilicity of silicone hydrogel lens types. As both surface modification techniques and lipid deposition have been linked to contact lens comfort and biocompatibility, 31,32 this staining technique may also be useful in determining the wearability of silicone hydrogel lenses. The mean Sudan IV dye binding response in conventional and silicone hydrogels for saline control lenses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visualizing Hydrophobic Domains in Silicone Hydrogel Lenses with Sudan IV

Jacob

Levet

Edwards

et al. 2012

Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE.A lipophilic dye is used to investigate the degree to which the surface and bulk hydrophobic domains of the lenses can be imaged and to identify specific changes in the availability of those domains after in vitro wear and cleaning conditions. The effect of a multipurpose solution (MPS), OPTI-FREE RepleniSH, on lens hydrophobic domains was also investigated.METHODS. Hydrophobic domains were determined using a saturated solution of Sudan IV. Staining periods of 30 minutes and 16 hours were used to determine surface versus bulk hydrophobic domains. Four types of silicone hydrogel lens materials were tested. The degree of staining was visually documented by photography and quantitatively determined by extraction and analysis of the total amount of dye adsorbed.RESULTS. Specific differences in staining were found for all control lenses. Exposure to in vitro wear conditions significantly decreased the staining response for all lens types as compared with unworn lenses (P ¼ 0.001). However, the trend of staining remained the same: balafilcon A > galyfilcon A > senofilcon A > lotrafilcon B. MPS decreased the extent of staining; the degree of its effect varied with lens type.CONCLUSIONS. Hydrophobic staining with Sudan IV visualized domains on and within silicone hydrogel lenses. Differences in staining response after exposure to wear and cleaning conditions indicate the potential for protein and lipid deposition on the different lens types and the ability of MPS to affect that deposition. Hydrophobic staining may be useful for determining differences in surface modification and lipophilicity of silicone hydrogel lenses. (Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53:3473-3480)

show abstract

Deposits and symptomatology with soft contact lens wear

Cited by 54 publications

References 111 publications

Hyaluronic acid containing hydrogels for the reduction of protein adsorption

Hyaluronic acid containing hydrogels for the reduction of protein adsorption

Quantity and Conformation of Lysozyme Deposited on Conventional and Silicone Hydrogel Contact Lens Materials Using an In Vitro Model

Visualizing Hydrophobic Domains in Silicone Hydrogel Lenses with Sudan IV

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About