Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2023
The influence of soft contact lens material on the corneoscleral profile.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Consejo Alejandra, Roll Vanesa, Roman Denisa M, Remon Laura
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To objectively quantify changes in corneoscleral profile, as evaluated by the limbus position and corneoscleral junction (CSJ) angle, as a consequence of wearing different soft contact lens (CL) materials.
METHODS: Twenty-two healthy participants wore silicone hydrogel (SiHy, MyDay, CooperVision) and hydrogel (Hy, Biomedics 1 day extra, CooperVision) soft CLs for 8 h per lens in their left eye. In each session, corneoscleral topography was captured before and immediately after CL removal with an Eye Surface Profiler. Previously validated automatic and objective algorithms for limbal position and CSJ angle calculation were applied to 360 semi-meridians to investigate the effect of short-term CL wear on corneoscleral topography, globally and by sectors, depending on the soft CL material worn.
RESULTS: Short-term soft CL wear significantly impacted limbal position (SiHy: 120 ± 97 μm, Hy: 128 ± 85 μm) and CSJ angle (SiHy: 0.57 ± 0.36°, Hy: 0.55 ± 0.40°); all p < 0.05. A statistically significant difference was found between the sectors with regard to limbus position and CSJ angle before CL wear that remained following lens wear (all pairwise comparisons, p < 0.001). Although individual differences were observed, there was no evidence that one material caused more substantial corneoscleral alterations.
CONCLUSION: Corneoscleral profile parameters were altered significantly following 8 h of soft CL wear. The observed changes in limbus position and CSJ angle support the importance of participant-material biocompatibility.
METHODS: Twenty-two healthy participants wore silicone hydrogel (SiHy, MyDay, CooperVision) and hydrogel (Hy, Biomedics 1 day extra, CooperVision) soft CLs for 8 h per lens in their left eye. In each session, corneoscleral topography was captured before and immediately after CL removal with an Eye Surface Profiler. Previously validated automatic and objective algorithms for limbal position and CSJ angle calculation were applied to 360 semi-meridians to investigate the effect of short-term CL wear on corneoscleral topography, globally and by sectors, depending on the soft CL material worn.
RESULTS: Short-term soft CL wear significantly impacted limbal position (SiHy: 120 ± 97 μm, Hy: 128 ± 85 μm) and CSJ angle (SiHy: 0.57 ± 0.36°, Hy: 0.55 ± 0.40°); all p < 0.05. A statistically significant difference was found between the sectors with regard to limbus position and CSJ angle before CL wear that remained following lens wear (all pairwise comparisons, p < 0.001). Although individual differences were observed, there was no evidence that one material caused more substantial corneoscleral alterations.
CONCLUSION: Corneoscleral profile parameters were altered significantly following 8 h of soft CL wear. The observed changes in limbus position and CSJ angle support the importance of participant-material biocompatibility.