Search for:
Home
This Month
Editorial
Hydrogen peroxide versus multipurpose disinfecting solutions, what are the differences?
more
Featured Review
1 & 2 step H2O2 CLs disinfection solutions against Acanthamoeba: How effective are they?
more
Posters
30-Day CW on Corneal Epithelial Barrier Function: RGP vs SiH Lenses
more
In The Practice
Case Studies using Silicone Hydrogel Lenses more
Tell a friend
Home
About Us
Affiliates
Contact Us
Disclaimer
Site Map

 

Quick Vote:
What proportion of your patients wearing Silicone Hydrogel lenses do you recommend hydrogen peroxide? click

 

Would you like to subscribe to our monthly newsletter?   click
 
This site is partially funded through an unrestricted educational grant from CIBA Vision

 
Posters | Archive
January 2007

 

Clinical Manifestations of Upper Lid Staining in Adapted Silicone Hydrogel Lens Wearers

J Varikooty, S Srinivasan, A Chan, L Subbaraman, C Woods, T Simpson, L Jones, D Fonn, CCLR, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada

 

Purpose: During blinking the marginal conjunctiva of the upper eyelid is in close apposition to the ocular surface, resulting in upper lid margin staining (ULMS). ULMS may be a useful diagnostic sign in subjects who exhibit symptoms but no obvious clinical manifestations of dry eye disease. The purpose of this study was to show the different clinical presentations of ULMS in adapted silicone hydrogel (SH) contact lens wearers.

Methods: 38 adapted SH lens wearers wearing a variety of SH materials were evaluated for ULMS using fluorescein (Fl) and lissamine green (LG) stains. Digital images were obtained with both stains and ULMS patterns were evaluated using digital image analysis.

Results: ULMS was sorted into 6 different categories, including, no ULMS, ULMS with vertical streaks, short horizontal band ULMS, speckled ULMS, comb-shaped ULMS and thick horizontal band ULMS. The percentages of subjects with ULMS were; 45 with Fl, 74 with LG and 42 with Fl+LG stains. In eyes with ULMS the distribution patterns were: vertical streak patterns in 3% with Fl and 13% with LG; short horizontal band in 16% with Fl and 26% with LG; speckled appearance in 21% with Fl and 27% with LG; comb-shaped appearance in 8% with Fl and 27% with LG; thick horizontal band in 18% with Fl and 29% with LG. The data report the prevalence of subjects with different ULMS patterns, and as some subjects had different types in each eye the percentages add up to more than 100.

Conclusions: Using Fl and LG stains, we were able to identify 5 different clinical patterns of ULMS. This is the first report of the range of clinical manifestations of ULMS with Fl and LG stains, in subjects wearing SH materials. Evaluation of these patterns would aid in the management of ULMS. Further studies are needed to understand the relationship between these clinical signs and reported symptoms.

Sponsor: Johnson & Johnson Vision Care

Download PDF of Poster:
Download - 168 KB
You will need Version 4 or later of Adobe Acrobat Reader to view some documents on this site. You can get the latest version from the Adobe Home site. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
All rights reserved, copyright 2002 - 2007 siliconehydrogels.org