Rachael C. Peterson

Multipurpose disinfecting solutions and their interactions with a silicone hydrogel lens.

Purpose: To assess the compatibility of a new silicone hydrogel lens, asmofilcon A (with four multipurpose disinfecting solutions: OPTIFREE RepleniSH, ReNu MultiPlus, Solo-Care Aqua and MeniCare Soft). Ocular responses and subjective responses were monitored with each lens-care system combination. Methods: The study was conducted as a prospective, bilateral, clinical trial with a single-masked investigator, and randomized cross-over design with four phases, (one for each care system). Each study phase comprised of two consecutive days of lens wear where the lenses were inserted on day 1 directly from the blister-packs and worn for over 8 hr, then inserted on day 2 after overnight disinfection with one of the study lens care systems. Twenty-five adapted soft contact lens wearers who were able to wear their habitual lenses comfortably for more than 12 hr were recruited. Results: There were statistically significant differences in corneal staining found for all the lens-care systems when comparing the results of day 1 (from the blister pack) with day 2 (following care system use) (P < 0.05). ReNu MultiPlus solution had the highest grade for corneal staining at the 2-hr time point on day 2 which then decreased by 6 hr (P < 0.05). There was no difference between the lens care systems and the rating of subjective comfort over either of the two days. The rating of dryness and burning sensations were only slightly increased at 6 hr for all lens care systems except ReNu MultiPlus where burning was highest on insertion (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Corneal staining observed in this study does not seem to have been related to the presence of polyhexamethylene biguanide (0.0001% wv) that was present in three of the four care systems. Only one care system (ReNu MultiPlus) demonstrated an associated level of corneal staining that was statistically significant; however, this was not considered to be of clinical relevance. These results suggest that using this novel surface-treated silicone hydrogel lens may result in less lens and lens care-related interactions.

Objective grading of the anterior eye.

Purpose. To convert objective image analysis of anterior ocular surfaces into recognisable clinical grades, in order to provide a more sensitive and reliable equivalent to current subjective grading methods; a prospective, randomized study correlating clinical grading with digital image assessment. Methods. The possible range of clinical presentations of bulbar and palpebral hyperaemia, palpebral roughness and corneal staining were represented by 4 sets of 10 images. The images were displayed in random order and graded by 50 clinicians using both subjective CCLRU and Efron grading scales. Previously validated objective image analysis was performed 3 times on each of the 40 images. Digital measures included edge-detection and relative-coloration components. Step-wise regression analysis determined correlations between the average subjective grade and the objective image analysis measures. Results. Average subjective grades could be predicted by a combination of the objective image analysis components. These digital “grades” accounted for between 69% (for Efron scale-graded palpebral redness) and 98% (for Efron scale-graded bulbar hyperaemia) of the subjective variance. Conclusions. The results indicate that clinicians may use a combination of vessel areas and overall hue in their judgment of clinical severity for certain conditions. Objective grading can take these aspects into account, and be used to predict an average “objective grade” to be used by a clinician in describing the anterior eye. These measures are more sensitive and reliable than subjective grading while still utilizing familiar terminology, and can be applied in research or practice to improve the detection, and monitoring of ocular surface changes.

A review of current knowledge on Electronic Vision Enhancement Systems for the visually impaired.

Magnification can be provided to assist those with visual impairment to make the best use of remaining vision. Electronic transverse magnification of an object was first conceived for use in low vision in the late 1950s, but has developed slowly and is not extensively prescribed because of its relatively high cost and lack of portability. Electronic devices providing transverse magnification have been termed closed‐circuit televisions (CCTVs) because of the direct cable link between the camera imaging system and monitor viewing system, but this description generally refers to surveillance devices and does not indicate the provision of features such as magnification and contrast enhancement. Therefore, the term Electronic Vision Enhancement Systems (EVES) is proposed to better distinguish and describe such devices. This paper reviews current knowledge on EVES for the visually impaired in terms of: classification; hardware and software (development of technology, magnification and field‐of‐view, contrast and image enhancement); user aspects (users and usage, reading speed and duration, and training); and potential future development of EVES.

Sensitivity and reliability of objective image analysis compared to subjective grading of bulbar hyperaemia

Aims: To establish the sensitivity and reliability of objective image analysis in direct comparison with subjective grading of bulbar hyperaemia. Methods: Images of the same eyes were captured with a range of bulbar hyperaemia caused by vasodilation. The progression was recorded and 45 images extracted. The images were objectively analysed on 14 occasions using previously validated edge-detection and colour-extraction techniques. They were also graded by 14 eye-care practitioners (ECPs) and 14 non-clinicians (NCLs) using the Efron scale. Six ECPs repeated the grading on three separate occasions Results: Subjective grading was only able to differentiate images with differences in grade of 0.70–1.03 Efron units (sensitivity of 0.30–0.53), compared to 0.02–0.09 Efron units with objective techniques (sensitivity of 0.94–0.99). Significant differences were found between ECPs and individual repeats were also inconsistent (p<0.001). Objective analysis was 16× more reliable than subjective analysis. The NCLs used wider ranges of the scale but were more variable than ECPs, implying that training may have an effect on grading. Conclusions: Objective analysis may offer a new gold standard in anterior ocular examination, and should be developed further as a clinical research tool to allow more highly powered analysis, and to enhance the clinical monitoring of anterior eye disease.

Benefits of electronic vision enhancement systems (EVES) for the visually impaired

PURPOSE To examine whether objective performance of near tasks is improved with various electronic vision enhancement systems (EVES) compared with the subjects own optical magnifier. DESIGN Experimental study, randomized, within-patient design. METHODS This was a prospective study, conducted in a hospital ophthalmology low-vision clinic. The patient population comprised 70 sequential visually impaired subjects. The magnifying devices examined were: patients optimum optical magnifier; magnification and field-of-view matched mouse EVES with monitor or head-mounted display (HMD) viewing; and stand EVES with monitor viewing. The tasks performed were: reading speed and acuity; time taken to track from one column of print to the next; follow a route map, and locate a specific feature; and identification of specific information from a medicine label. RESULTS Mouse EVES with HMD viewing caused lower reading speeds than stand EVES with monitor viewing (F = 38.7, P <.001). Reading with the optical magnifier was slower than with the mouse or stand EVES with monitor viewing at smaller print sizes (P <.05). The column location task was faster with the optical magnifier than with any of the EVES (F = 10.3, P <.001). The map tracking and medicine label identification task was slower with the mouse EVES with HMD viewing than with the other magnifiers (P <.01). Previous EVES experience had no effect on task performance (P >.05), but subjects with previous optical magnifier experience were significantly slower at performing the medicine label identification task with all of the EVES (P <.05). CONCLUSIONS Although EVES provide objective benefits to the visually impaired in reading speed and acuity, together with some specific near tasks, some can be performed just as fast using optical magnification.

The effect of digital image resolution and compression on anterior eye imaging

Aim: To determine the theoretical and clinical minimum image pixel resolution and maximum compression appropriate for anterior eye image storage. Methods: Clinical images of the bulbar conjunctiva, palpebral conjunctiva, and corneal staining were taken at the maximum resolution of Nikon:CoolPix990 (2048×1360 pixels), DVC:1312C (1280×811), and JAI:CV-S3200 (767×569) single chip cameras and the JVC:KYF58 (767×569) three chip camera. The images were stored in TIFF format and further copies created with reduced resolution or compressed. The images were then ranked for clarity on a 15 inch monitor (resolution 1280×1024) by 20 optometrists and analysed by objective image analysis grading. Theoretical calculation of the resolution necessary to detect the smallest objects of clinical interest was also conducted. Results: Theoretical calculation suggested that the minimum resolution should be ⩾579 horizontal pixels at 25× magnification. Image quality was perceived subjectively as being reduced when the pixel resolution was lower than 767×569 (p<0.005) or the image was compressed as a BMP or <50% quality JPEG (p<0.005). Objective image analysis techniques were less susceptible to changes in image quality, particularly when using colour extraction techniques. Conclusion: It is appropriate to store anterior eye images at between 1280×811 and 767×569 pixel resolution and at up to 1:70 JPEG compression.

Anterior ophthalmic imaging.

Improvements in imaging chips and computer processing power have brought major advances in imaging of the anterior eye. Digitally captured images can be visualised immediately and can be stored and retrieved easily. Anterior ocular imaging techniques using slitlamp biomicroscopy, corneal topography, confocal microscopy, optical coherence tomography (OCT), ultrasonic biomicroscopy, computerised tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are reviewed. Conventional photographic imaging can be used to quantify corneal topography, corneal thickness and transparency, anterior chamber depth and lateral angle and crystalline lens position, curvature, thickness and transparency. Additionally, the effects of tumours, foreign bodies and trauma can be localised, the corneal layers can be examined and the tear film thickness assessed.

Impact of a rub and rinse on solution-induced corneal staining

Purpose. To investigate whether the inclusion of a rub and rinse step before contact lens disinfection has an impact on solution-induced corneal staining. Methods. This was a prospective, double-masked, single investigator study. Twenty participants were recruited for two visits, where balafilcon-A lenses were worn bilaterally for 2 h. Each pair of lenses was prepared using two different methodologies. The “control” lens was transferred from the blister pack directly into a storage case containing polyhexamethylene biguanide-based lens care solution. The contralateral “test” lens was rubbed and simultaneously rinsed using the same polyhexamethylene biguanide-based care solution, for either 60 s (visit 1) or 20 s (visit 2). Both lenses were then soaked in the solution overnight. After baseline corneal staining assessments, the lenses were inserted following a randomized contralateral model. After 2 h, lenses were removed, corneal staining was regraded, and comfort scores were obtained. Results. Rubbed and rinsed test lenses induced significantly less corneal staining than control lenses for all participants during visit 1 (mean ± SD: 516 ± 843 vs. 2170 ± 902; p < 0.001) and visit 2 (522 ± 417 vs. 2091 ± 965; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the test lenses during visits 1 and 2 (p = 0.72) or controls (p = 0.50). Comfort scores did not differ between eyes (p > 0.05). Conclusions. Corneal staining induced after 2 h of lens wear with the combination of balafilcon-A and polyhexamethylene biguanide-based lens care solution can be significantly reduced by including a rub and rinse step before overnight soaking. Further work is required to establish the longevity of this effect during the monthly wearing cycle.

Corneal staining as a response to contact lens wear.

Objective: To review the effects of contact lenses on the corneal surface. Methods: A review of the literature and in-house research of corneal staining and its various forms of presentation. Results: Corneal staining manifests in many different forms. The severity of staining or insult of the cornea is usually determined by the extent (area of coverage), density, and depth. The cause of staining is multifactorial, and its location is often linked to the type of lens that is being worn, the solution used to clean/disinfect the lens, the state of hydration of the soft lens, and the state of the cornea that has been affected by the lens. Conclusions: Sodium fluorescein dye effectively highlights corneal integrity changes referred to as corneal staining. This review describes the manifestations, the cause, the mechanisms, and the methods of remediation of corneal staining.

Human Corneal Epithelial Cell Shedding and Fluorescein Staining in Response to Silicone Hydrogel Lenses and Contact Lens Disinfecting Solutions

Abstract Purpose: A pilot study was conducted to evaluate human corneal epithelial cell shedding in response to wearing a silicone hydrogel contact lens/solution combination inducing corneal staining. The nature of ex vivo collected cells staining with fluorescein was also examined. Methods: A contralateral eye study was conducted in which up to eight participants were unilaterally exposed to a multipurpose contact lens solution/silicone hydrogel lens combination previously shown to induce corneal staining (renu® fresh™ and balafilcon A; test eye), with the other eye using a combination of balafilcon A soaked in a hydrogen peroxide care system (Clear Care®; control eye). Lenses were worn for 2, 4 or 6 hours. Corneal staining was graded after lens removal. The Ocular Surface Cell Collection Apparatus was used to collect cells from the cornea and the contact lens. Results: In the test eye, maximum solution-induced corneal staining (SICS) was observed after 2 hours of lens wear (reducing significantly by 4 hours; p < 0.001). There were significantly more cells collected from the test eye after 4 hours of lens wear when compared to the control eye and the collection from the test eye after 2 hours (for both; n = 5; p < 0.001). The total cell yield at 4 hours was 813 ± 333 and 455 ± 218 for the test and control eyes, respectively (N = 5, triplicate, p = 0.003). A number of cells were observed to have taken up the fluorescein dye from the initial fluorescein instillation. Confocal microscopy of fluorescein-stained cells revealed that fluorescein was present throughout the cell cytoplasm and was retained in the cells for many hours after recovery from the corneal surface. Conclusion: This pilot study indicates that increased epithelial cell shedding was associated with a lens-solution combination which induces SICS. Our data provides insight into the transient nature of the SICS reaction and the nature of fluorescein staining observed in SICS.