LarryDoc <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>2. for some people, the actual cause of apparent dryness issues is a
>problem with the contact lens care products---multipurpose solutions
>(USA brands like Opti-Free (three formulations), RenNu (four
>formulations in the last two years), and a few others) being the most
>likely culprit. It turns out that brand A might be fine to use with one
>plastic and not at all appropriate for another plastic. And once in a
>while the chemicals in the storage solution just don't agree with a
>wearer's eye tissues. There's also an issue with "discount" and "store
>brand" multipurpose solutions. What's in the bottle you bought last
>month might not be the same formulation that's in bottle you purchased
>yesterday. The fix for this issue is often switching to a hydrogen
>peroxide based storage solution such as ClearCare, AOSept or Ultracare.
>These are USA brand names. The brand names in other countries are a
>little different.
Ob That -- and for those with the patience (patients?) to read it:
http://snipurl.com/kkuy
[snipped]
Discussion
For patients using soft contact lenses, rinsing off the lens with
contact lens care solutions before applying the lens onto the eye is
common. However, the contact lens keeps attached a few microliters of
the contact lens care solution. We found by gravidity measurements
that up to 50 µl of solution remained on the contact lens surface
(data not shown).
It was our aim to examine the influence of different soft contact lens
care solutions on human conjunctival cells. The four solutions tested
are well tolerated in cell culture at concentrations of 5 µl/ml medium
as shown with the MTT test. At 10 µl/ml medium, OptiFree and Titmus
showed an inhibited cell viability. At the highest concentrations of
50 µl/ml medium for all four solutions investigated, a significant
damage to the mitochondria with the MTT assay was observed. The MTT
test measures the activity of mitochondrial dehydrogenases and is
therefore a sensitive test for cell viability, because damages of the
cells can be recognized early [35]. Depending on the concentration,
all contact lens care solutions have the potential to be harmful.
With the cell analysis system (CASY 1) the cell count, the cell volume
and the cell diameter can be determined by a passage through a
measuring pore and the results appear in a display and can be printed
out. With this test, no significant changes in the number of viable
human conjunctival fibroblasts after incubation of contact lens
solutions could be observed. Although these solutions induce a
reduction in mitochondrial activity in a concentration-dependent
manner, this damage is probably reversible since no cell death could
be observed with the CASY 1 system. Even at longer duration of
incubation (up to 72 h) and higher concentrations, no negative effect
was observed in the CASY system, indicating an outweighing tolerance
of the tested products.
It is noteworthy that these commercially available soft contact lens
solutions contain a mixture of different components (table 1) which
are not comparable to each other. We attached importance to the
cumulative effect of all the ingredients of the tested products.
Surprisingly, the effect on the conjunctival cells tested with the MTT
assay and the CASY 1 system was quite similar for each solution.
The constant physiologic lacrimal secretion causes a rapid dilution
and losses due to nasolacrimal drainage away from the ocular surface.
Normal drainage of an instilled dose of topical ophthalmic medication
begins immediately and the drug is essentially completely removed from
the ocular surface within 5 min [36]. In addition to tear film
production and drainage, the effect of topical application of
solutions is influenced by blink rate, concentration, penetration and
total dosage. Although rinsing off contact lenses is happening once a
day and only small volumes of contact lens care solutions are getting
in contact with the ocular surface, in long-term contact lens wearers,
reflex secretion may be decreased [37], therefore toxic substances
remain longer in contact with the ocular surface.
An in vitro study that examines a limited number of parameters cannot
alone predict the outcome of an in vivo use. But the MTT test and the
cell analysis system (CASY 1) enable objective statements on the
cytotoxicity of chemical substances and drugs on cell cultures such as
conjunctival cells [38, 39] and can decrease the number of animal
experiments. The tests described above provide initial information
concerning the kind of possible negative effects caused by contact
lens care regimens.
In summary, we found that all four soft contact lens care solutions
demonstrate slight toxic effects at higher concentrations on
conjunctival fibroblasts in vitro. It must, however, be pointed out
that these effects observed in vitro do not necessarily predict the
situation in vivo. Nevertheless, contact lens care solutions should
not be used carelessly. Every solution, even unpreserved, contains
certain active agents which should kill germs. It seems reasonable
that not only germs are attacked but also cells of the ocular surface.
Therefore, patients have to be informed about possible irritations and
if these occur then replacement of the contact lens care regimen
should be considered.
--
Live simply so that others may simply live