Search

Prcis: About one-fourth of survey respondents from an ASCRS database initiate treatment for primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) with laser trabeculoplasty. Factors impacting physicians' choice of laser versus topical treatment for POAG were explored., Purpose: To characterize primary treatment preferences (topical medication versus laser trabeculoplasty or intracameral sustained release implants) in primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) patients and determine factors related to primary intervention selection., Methods: A 33-question survey was distributed to an American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery database on treatment choices made by ophthalmologists for POAG. Data collected included country of practice, years of practice, completion of glaucoma fellowship training, type of practice, and preference for the first line of treatment for POAG. Multiple logit regression was used to compare the effect of covariates on physicians' choice of either topical medication or laser trabeculoplasty for POAG., Results: A total of 252 of 19,246 (1.3%) surveys were returned. Almost three-quarters of respondents used topical medication as the first line of treatment for POAG (73.6%), whereas 26.4% preferred to start with laser treatment. Significant variables associated with the selection of laser (vs. drops) are practicing in the United States (odds ratio [OR] 2.85; 95% CI, 1.33-6.10), the more recent completion of ophthalmology residency (OR 1.95; 95% CI, 1.00-3.77), the greater volume of minimally invasive glaucoma surgeries (MIGS) (OR 1.68; 95% CI, 1.18-2.40), and a glaucoma patient base greater than 25% (OR 2.21; 95% CI, 1.09-4.48)., Conclusions: For the first-line treatment of POAG, laser trabeculoplasty is more likely to be preferred, over topical drops, by U.S. physicians who are relatively new in practice, who have a larger glaucoma patient base, and who perform more MIGS., Competing Interests: Disclosure: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Abstract: Contact lenses are a safe and effective method for correction of refractive error and worn by an estimated 45 million Americans. Because of the widespread availability and commercial popularity of contact lenses, it is not well appreciated by the public that contact lenses are U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-regulated medical devices. Contact lenses are marketed in numerous hard and soft materials that have been improved over decades, worn in daily or extended wear, and replaced in range of schedules from daily to yearly or longer. Lens materials and wear and care regimens have impact on the risks of contact lens-related corneal inflammatory events and microbial keratitis. This article reviews contact lens safety, with specific focus on the correction of refractive error in healthy eyes., Competing Interests: The authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Contact Lens Association of Opthalmologists.)

Competing Interests: The author has no conflicts of interest to disclose.

The medical use of contact lenses is a solution for many complex ocular conditions, including high refractive error, irregular astigmatism, primary and secondary corneal ectasia, disfiguring disease, and ocular surface disease. The development of highly oxygen permeable soft and rigid materials has extended the suitability of contact lenses for such applications. There is consistent evidence that bandage soft contact lenses, particularly silicone hydrogel lenses, improve epithelial healing and reduce pain in persistent epithelial defects, after trauma or surgery, and in corneal dystrophies. Drug delivery applications of contact lens hold promise for improving topical therapy. Modern scleral lens practice has achieved great success for both visual rehabilitation and therapeutic applications, including those requiring retention of a tear reservoir or protection from an adverse environment. This report offers a practical and relevant summary of the current evidence for the medical use of contact lenses for all eye care professionals including optometrists, ophthalmologists, opticians, and orthoptists. Topics covered include indications for use in both acute and chronic conditions, lens selection, patient selection, wear and care regimens, and recommended aftercare schedules. Prevention, presentation, and management of complications of medical use are reviewed., (Copyright © 2021 British Contact Lens Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Keratoconus is characterised by reduced rigidity of the cornea with distortion and focal thinning that causes blurred vision, however, the pathogenetic mechanisms are unknown. It can lead to severe visual morbidity in children and young adults and is a common indication for corneal transplantation worldwide. Here we report the first large scale genome-wide association study of keratoconus including 4,669 cases and 116,547 controls. We have identified significant association with 36 genomic loci that, for the first time, implicate both dysregulation of corneal collagen matrix integrity and cell differentiation pathways as primary disease-causing mechanisms. The results also suggest pleiotropy, with some disease mechanisms shared with other corneal diseases, such as Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy. The common variants associated with keratoconus explain 12.5% of the genetic variance, which shows potential for the future development of a diagnostic test to detect susceptibility to disease.

Significance: Standardized guidelines that are clinically practical are needed to assist the prescriber in minimizing the risk of conveying infection through multiuse diagnostic contact lens use and reuse.Contact lens prescribers face the specter of transferring potential pathogens from one patient to another when reusing diagnostic (trial) contact lenses on multiple patients because infectious organisms have been recovered from worn contact lenses, although there is no evidence of transmission through this mechanism. These pathogens can be introduced into the system from one patient to another, or they may be introduced by clinician lens handling, storage, or both. These pathogens can cause acute or chronic systemic or ocular infection that can lead to significant morbidity (temporary or permanent) that includes vision loss.

Significance: Lotrafilcon B lenses packaged in and cared for with block copolymer-containing (polyoxyethylene-polyoxybutylene; EOBO) lens care solutions resulted in lower cholesterol extraction than each of the habitual silicone hydrogel lens/multipurpose solution (MPS) regimens tested., Purpose: This study aimed to compare the extracted cholesterol of lotrafilcon B lenses packaged in and cared for with EOBO-containing lens care solutions with the extracted cholesterol of habitual silicone hydrogel lenses cared for with MPS not containing EOBO., Methods: In this prospective, randomized, observer-masked parallel study, habitual wearers of senofilcon C, senofilcon A, comfilcon A, and samfilcon A contact lenses using a non-EOBO MPS were randomized 1:1 to lotrafilcon B lenses packaged in and cared for with EOBO-containing solutions or to their habitual lenses and MPS. Subjects randomized to lotrafilcon B were further randomized to one of two EOBO-containing lens care solutions, OPTI-FREE PUREMOIST or CLEAR CARE PLUS with HydraGlyde (Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Fort Worth, TX). A subset of right eye lenses was collected after wear, and total cholesterol was extracted and measured using a fluorometric enzymatic assay., Results: Of 143 lenses analyzed, 95 were from subjects randomized to their habitual lenses/MPS and 48 to lotrafilcon B + EOBO lenses plus CLEAR CARE PLUS with HydraGlyde or OPTI-FREE PUREMOIST. The mean amounts of cholesterol extracted from lotrafilcon B + EOBO lenses cared for with CLEAR CARE PLUS with HydraGlyde (0.28 ± 0.18 μg/lens) and OPTI-FREE PUREMOIST (0.28 ± 0.48 μg/lens) were significantly lower than those extracted from senofilcon C (4.18 ± 3.25 μg/lens), senofilcon A (2.19 ± 2.69 μg/lens), comfilcon A (2.17 ± 1.47 μg/lens), and samfilcon A (2.07 ± 1.48 μg/lens) lenses used with MPS (P < .0001 each)., Conclusions: Cholesterol sorption was significantly lower in wearers of lotrafilcon B lenses cared for with polyoxyethylene-polyoxybutylene-containing lens care solutions than in users of habitual silicone hydrogel lenses cared for with non-polyoxyethylene-polyoxybutylene MPS.

Purpose: This study assessed microbiome adherent to contact lenses and defined the bacterial communities associated with use of lens care solutions., Methods: Among 84 lenses screened for adherent ocular surface bacterial microbiome using 16S rRNA molecular amplification, 63 (75%) generated bacterial-specific amplicons processed using the Ion Torrent Personal Genome Machine workflow. Data were stratified by solution use (peroxide vs. polyhexamethylene biguanide [PHMB]-preserved multipurpose solution [MPS]). Diversity of lens-adherent microbiome was characterized using Shannon diversity index and richness index. Data were analyzed using principal components analysis and Kruskal-Wallis tests., Results: We identified 19 phyla and 167 genera of bacteria adherent to the lenses. Proteobacteria was the most abundant phyla, followed by Firmicutes and Actinobacteria. The most abundant bacterial genera (>1% abundance) were Ralstonia, Enterococcus, Streptococcus, Halomonas, Corynebacterium, Staphylococcus, Acinetobacter, Shewanella, Rhodococcus, and Cobetia. Sixteen of 20 lenses (80%) negative for bacterial DNA were worn by participants using peroxide solutions while only 4 (20%) were MPS-treated lenses (P=0.004). Genera diversity of lens-adherent microbiome showed a significant increase in MPS-treated lenses compared with peroxide (P=0.038). Abundance of Corynebacterium, Haemophilus, and Streptococcus were increased 4.3-, 12.3-, and 2.7-fold, respectively, in the MPS group compared with peroxide (P=0.014, 0.006, 0.047, respectively)., Conclusions: Commensal, environmental, and pathogenic bacteria known to be present in the conjunctival microbiome can be detected on worn contact lenses. Although most contact lenses worn by asymptomatic wearers harbor bacterial DNA, compared with peroxide, lenses stored in a PHMB-preserved MPS have more quantifiable, abundant, and diverse bacterial communities adherent to them.

Despite their established disinfection and safety benefits, the use of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) lens care systems among today's wearers of reusable contact lenses remains low in comparison with multipurpose solution (MPS) use. Multipurpose solution systems, however, present several potential drawbacks that may impact patient outcomes, including the use of chemical preservatives for disinfection, biocompatibility issues, and challenges with respect to lens care compliance. Given their unique composition and mechanism of action, one-step H2O2 systems offer the opportunity to avoid many of the challenges associated with MPS use. This article reviews the evolution of H2O2 lens care systems and examines the current scientific and clinical evidence regarding the relative ease of use, lens and tissue compatibility, disinfection efficacy, and ocular surface safety of H2O2 systems. Evaluation of the available data indicates that in comparison with MPS, one-step H2O2 systems tend to promote more favorable compliance, efficacy, comfort, and ocular surface outcomes for a wide range of contact lens-wearing patients. Based on the current published evidence, the authors recommend that eye care practitioners consider making one-step H2O2 systems their first-line contact lens care recommendation for most wearers of reusable lenses.

Corneal infiltrative events (CIEs) are well established as a risk associated with soft contact lens wear. The incidence of symptomatic CIEs during extended soft lens wear ranges from 2.5 to six per cent; when asymptomatic CIEs are included, the incidence can be as high as 20-25 per cent. In daily soft lens wear, the annual incidence of symptomatic CIEs is about three per cent. There are various accepted methods of categorising CIEs, and a scoring system based on clinical signs and symptoms is a good approach to grade severity. Lens-related risk factors include extended wear, silicone hydrogel material, the use of multipurpose solutions, bacterial bioburden and reusable lenses. Recent studies report that daily disposable lenses reduce the risk of CIEs., (© 2017 Optometry Australia.)

Purpose: To assess corneal epithelial microstructure via confocal microscopy and determine if cellular changes are associated with lens care solutions during daily wear of silicone hydrogel contact lenses., Methods: Corneal in vivo confocal microscopy with the Nidek ConfoScan4 was performed at baseline and after 5 months of lotrafilcon A daily contact lens wear. Enrolled participants were randomized to use either a polyhexamethylene biguanide (PHMB) preserved multipurpose care solution (MPS) or a peroxide based solution system. Lens and storage case bioburden were assessed with aerobic culture methods. Univariate and multivariable analyses were done to evaluate the association between solution use, or solution-related clinical covariates, and morphologic differences (hyper-reflectivity) in the superficial epithelial cells and epithelial basal cell density., Results: Data on 139 participants were available for analysis of superficial epithelial cells while data on 92 participants were available for epithelial basal cell density. Five months after randomization to the solution groups, 33% of participants had visible hyper-reflective cells. More participants using MPS had ≥1 hyper-reflective cells compared to peroxide users at 5 months (44% vs. 22%; p=0.006). Similarly at 5 months, more participants with solution-induced corneal staining (SICS) had ≥1 hyper-reflective cells compared to non-SICS participants (57% vs. 29%; p=0.010). The adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for risk of presenting with hyper-reflective cells in MPS users or SICS participants was 2.7 (95% CI; 1.27-5.65) and 3.4 (95% CI; 1.29-8.97), respectively. Basal cell density decreased by over 350 cells/mm 2 over time (about 6%) in participants who had substantial bioburden on their lenses or in their storage case., Conclusion: The confocal microscope can detect epithelial cellular changes in vivo during contact lens wear. Hyper-reflective superficial epithelial cells are associated with a PHMB preserved solution and decreases in basal epithelial cell density may be associated with bacterial bioburden., (Copyright © 2016 British Contact Lens Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess risk factors associated with soft contact lens (SCL)-related corneal infiltrative events (CIEs)., Methods: This was a single-visit, case-control study conducted at five academic centers in North America. Cases were defined as current SCL wearers with a symptomatic CIE. For each case, three age- and sex-matched controls were enrolled. Subjects completed the Contact Lens Risk Survey (CLRS), a standardized scripted medical interview, supplied a recent health history, and underwent an ocular examination. Microbial culturing of the ocular surface, SCL, and lens storage case was conducted for all cases and one of the three matched controls. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression modeling were used to assess the risk of developing a CIE., Results: Thirty cases and 90 controls 13 to 31 years of age completed the study. Corneal infiltrative event diagnosis included contact lens-associated red eye, infiltrative keratitis, and contact lens peripheral ulcer. Subjects with symptomatic CIEs were more likely to harbor substantial levels of gram-negative bioburden on the ocular surface and contact lens. Significant risk factors for developing a CIE were overnight wear of SCLs, use of multipurpose solution, rinsing SCLs with water, lens storage case older than 6 months, previous "red eye" event, use of ocular drops in the past week, and illness during the past week., Conclusions: This pilot study demonstrated feasibility of enrolling a representative pool of SCL wearers with an untreated, symptomatic CIE and assessing CIE risk factors by using standardized methods. A larger sample size is needed to determine relationships between patient-reported behaviors and exposures, microbial bioburden, and CIE development.

Phototherapy is an effective treatment option for a variety of dermatologic disorders, and the list of indications for its use continues to grow with advances in technology and our understanding of disease processes. Commonly used types of phototherapy include PUVA, broadband UVB, narrowband UVB, photodynamic therapy, and intense pulsed light therapy. Each therapeutic modality can have adverse acute and chronic effects on periocular and ocular structures, including the conjunctiva, cornea, crystalline lens, and retina. There are many types of protective eyewear options available, including goggles and contact lenses that can be used to prevent damage to ocular structures during phototherapy, particularly if eyelid closure is incomplete., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)