Extreme H2O contact lenses for dry eyes

Discussion in 'Contact Lenses' started by GraceH2420, Dec 6, 2005.

  1. GraceH2420

    GraceH2420 Guest

    Anybody have any experience with these contact lenses. Are they
    effective in offering relief to contact lense wearers with dry eye? Any
    info would be appreciated. Thanks
    GraceH2420, Dec 6, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. GraceH2420

    acemanvx Guest

    every brand of contacts ive worn still dried my eyes. Some brands took
    longer to dry my eyes. Ive been suggested to use eye drops or even get
    punctual plugs but if I need to go to such measures, I might as well
    stick to glasses
    acemanvx, Dec 6, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. I've fit quite a few of them, but not for dry eyes. Go LOW water
    content lenses for dry eyes, preferably one of the newer silicone based
    lenses like Oasys.

    w.stacy, o.d.
    William Stacy, Dec 6, 2005
  4. GraceH2420

    Jodie Guest

    I wore Extreme H20 lenses during a period when my eyes were too dry to
    wear my RGP lenses comfortably for more than a few hours. The Extreme
    H20 lenses were comfortable for as long as I chose to wear them.
    Compared to other soft lenses, they are very fragile and easily torn
    (even while being worn). A couple of times I removed about half a lens
    at the end of the day, and I never could figure out what had happened
    to the other half.
    Jodie, Dec 7, 2005
  5. GraceH2420

    CatmanX Guest

    Lenses to try are Acuvue advance, acuvue oasys, ciba O2optix, B&L
    PureVision and Ciba Night and Day. All are very good for dry eye

    dr grant
    CatmanX, Dec 7, 2005
  6. GraceH2420

    LarryDoc Guest

    This issue of contact lens comfort and dry eye comes up often in this
    group. I'd like to add a few comments.

    1. the water content of the lens has little or nothing to do with the
    lens surface losing moisture and becoming uncomfortable. That is a
    general statement and does not apply to ALL soft lens plastics but is
    generally valid. It is true, however, that some lower water content
    lenses maintain hydration better than higher water content lenses but
    the reverse is also true.

    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.

    3. there are three specific materials that tend to perform better for
    people with dry-er eyes: higher water materials omafilcon (Proclear
    brand), hioxifilcon (Extreme H2O and more than a half dozen other
    brands) and lower water content materialsilicone hydrogels (Oasys,
    Optix, Purevision, Night&Day brands.)

    4 and then sometimes is doesn't matter what you do--- it's a real dry
    eye problem and the fix has to be treating the underlying cause of the
    dry eye. That's a whole other discussion!

    LB, O.D.
    LarryDoc, Dec 7, 2005
  7. GraceH2420

    Neil Brooks Guest

    Ob That -- and for those with the patience (patients?) to read it:




    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.
    Neil Brooks, Dec 7, 2005
  8. GraceH2420

    Dan Abel Guest

    I'd like to add a couple, also. I've posted these before, but perhaps
    it's time again.

    1. The air makes a difference. I've had problems at work, both with
    eye dryness and respiratory problems. It took a few years, but I
    eventually learned (I guess I'm a slow learner) that when I had a bad
    cold, going to work meant an eventual ear infection, which meant even
    more time off work. A bad cold isn't fun, but an ear infection can be
    downright painful. Once I learned, I stayed home, because it was less
    time off of work in the end. Once I started wearing contacts, I
    discovered that I needed more eye drops at work. The plain saline drops
    worked at home. Especially in the winter, when the air was dryer, they
    didn't hack it at work. I bought special drops, but only for work.

    2. We went hiking one day, when I was wearing contacts. We only had a
    pint of water for the five of us. Not a problem, it was a short hike.
    It was a loop trail. We got lost. Not a problem, it was a lake. We
    were half way around the lake before we realized we had missed the
    turnoff for the loop. OK, we're doing a loop. We'll just continue
    around the lake. Bad idea. We get most of the way around and the trail
    is gone. Well, we aren't going back now. Up the mountain and through
    the brush. It was pretty hard. I get home, blink, and a contact falls
    out. I was dehydrated.
    Dan Abel, Dec 9, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.