Effects of commercial amniotic membrane extract on the re‐epithelialization time and the early expression of matrix metalloproteinase‐9 in cats with experimentally induced corneal ulcers

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate whether a commercially available amniotic membrane extract (AME) can accelerate corneal wound healing and suppress the early expression of MMP-9 in the tears of cats with experimentally induced superficial ulcerative keratitis.Procedures: A total number of 16 cats were included. At the end of keratectomy, cats in the treatment group (TG, n = 8) received 40 μl of AME (EyeQ® Amniotic Eye Drops, Vetrix®) four times daily, while cats in the control group (CG, n = 8) received 40 μl of saline at the same time points. Tears were collected 24 and 48 h after keratectomy, and the total MMP-9 was quantified by ELISA. Results:The corneal re-epithelialization rate did not differ between groups (p = .26), being 0.48 ± 0.05 mm 2 /h in the CG and 0.41 ± 0.03 mm 2 /h in the TG.Similarly, the average time to achieve corneal wound healing did not differ between groups (p = .25) and was 61.50 ± 3.54 h in the CG and 70.50 ± 6.71 h in the TG. The dimensions of the ulcerated areas also did not differ at any time point between the groups (p > .05). In both groups, corneas healed without scarring, pigmentation, or vascularization. The expression of MMP-9 in the tears was similar in both groups at 24 h post-keratectomy, with a slight decrease at 48 h (p > .05). Conclusions:The instillation of a commercial AME (EyeQ®) is safe, but it did not decrease the corneal re-epithelialization time or the early expression of MMP-9 in the tears of cats with experimentally induced superficial ulcerative keratitis in this study.

Effects of topical ketorolac tromethamine on tear parameters, meibography, goblet cell density, and conjunctival oxidative stress in healthy dogs

“…All the aforementioned procedures were performed before the treatments to obtain baseline values and were repeated 15 and 30 days after treatments initiation, and a final evaluation was made 60 days post‐treatments. For all evaluations, clinical signs were graded as absent (0), mild (1), moderate (2), or severe (3) using validated scoring systems previously reported 33 . To avoid excessive inter‐observer differences in the assignment of ranks, all clinical ophthalmic evaluations were performed by the same examiner, blinded to the treatments, always at 6 p.m.…”

“…For all evaluations, clinical signs were graded as absent (0), mild (1), moderate (2), or severe (3) using validated scoring systems previously reported. 33 To avoid excessive inter-observer differences in the assignment of ranks, all clinical ophthalmic evaluations were performed by the same examiner, blinded to the treatments, always at 6 p.m. In addition, all evaluations were performed in a room with 39 lux luminosity, 42.5%-45% of relative humidity, and 25°C of temperature (Medidor Multifunção ITPM-600, Instrutemp).…”

Modulating Growth Factor Receptor Signaling to Promote Corneal Epithelial Homeostasis

“…The first use of AM on the ocular surface Is credited to de Rötth in 1940 [164], and since then, it has been used extensively in research and in the clinic. However, AM is limited in comfortability for the patient, how it is preserved, the variability of sources that it comes from, the types of corneal wounds that it can aid, and it does not address the underlying pathology [165][166][167][168]. However, it is still used in the clinic and is efficacious for healing some wounds [169], though the effects of the growth factors contained in AM have not been well-tested.…”