Protection against corneal hyperosmolarity with soft-contact-lens wear

Hyperosmotic tear stimulates human corneal nerve endings, activates ocular immune response, and elicits dry-eye symptoms. A soft contact lens (SCL) covers the cornea preventing it from experiencing direct tear evaporation and the resulting blink-periodic salinity increases. For the cornea to experience hyperosmolarity due to tear evaporation, salt must transport across the SCL to the post-lens tear film (PoLTF) bathing the cornea. Consequently, limited salt transport across a SCL potentially protects the ocular surface from hyperosmotic tear. In addition, despite lens-wear discomfort sharing common sensations to dry eye, no correlation is available between measured tear hyperosmolarity and SCL-wear discomfort. Lack of documentation is likely because clinical measurements of tear osmolarity during lens wear do not interrogate the tear osmolarity of the PoLTF that actually overlays the cornea. Rather, tear osmolarity is clinically measured in the tear meniscus. For the first time, we mathematically quantify tear osmolarity in the PoLTF and show that it differs significantly from the clinically measured tear-meniscus osmolarity. We show further that aqueous-deficient dry eye and evaporative dry eye both exacerbate the hyperosmolarity of the PoLTF. Nevertheless, depending on lens salt-transport properties (i.e., diffusivity, partition coefficient, and thickness), a SCL can indeed protect against corneal hyperosmolarity by reducing PoLTF salinity to below that of the ocular surface during no-lens wear. Importantly, PoLTF osmolarity for dry-eye patients can be reduced to that of normal eyes with no-lens wear provided that the lens exhibits a low lens-salt diffusivity. Infrequent blinking increases PoLTF osmolarity consistent with lens-wear discomfort. Judicious design of SCL material salt-transport properties can ameliorate corneal hyperosmolarity. Our results confirm the importance of PoLTF osmolarity during SCL wear and indicate a possible relation between PoLTF osmolarity and contact-lens discomfort.     

Epidemiologic Characteristics of Work-related Eye Injuries and Risk Factors Associated with Severe Eye Injuries: A Registry-based Multicentre Study

ABSTRACT

Purpose

Work-related eye injuries have been reported with a variety of epidemiologic and clinical characteristics. We aimed to identify epidemiologic characteristics of work-related eye injuries and risk factors associated with severe injury in a large metropolitan city.     

Lifitegrast clinical efficacy for treatment of signs and symptoms of dry eye disease across three randomized controlled trials

Objective: Report efficacy findings from three clinical trials (one phase 2 and two phase 3 [OPUS-1, OPUS-2]) of lifitegrast ophthalmic solution 5.0% for treatment of dry eye disease (DED).

Research design and methods: Three 84-day, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trials. Adults (≥18 years) with DED were randomized (1:1) to lifitegrast 5.0% or matching placebo. Changes from baseline to day 84 in signs and symptoms of DED were analyzed.

Main outcome measures: Phase 2, pre-specified endpoint: inferior corneal staining score (ICSS; 0–4); OPUS-1, coprimary endpoints: ICSS and visual-related function subscale (0–4 scale); OPUS-2, coprimary endpoints: ICSS and eye dryness score (EDS, VAS; 0–100).

Results: Fifty-eight participants were randomized to lifitegrast 5.0% and 58 to placebo in the phase 2 trial; 293 to lifitegrast and 295 to placebo in OPUS-1; 358 to lifitegrast and 360 to placebo in OPUS-2. In participants with mild-to-moderate baseline DED symptomatology, lifitegrast improved ICSS versus placebo in the phase 2 study (treatment effect, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.05–0.65; p?=?0.0209) and OPUS-1 (effect, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.10–0.38; p?=?0.0007). Among more symptomatic participants (baseline EDS ≥40, recent artificial tear use), lifitegrast improved EDS versus placebo in a post hoc analysis of OPUS-1 (effect, 13.34; 95% CI, 2.35–24.33; nominal p?=?0.0178) and in OPUS-2 (effect, 12.61; 95% CI, 8.51–16.70; p?<?0.0001).

Limitations: Trials were conducted over 12 weeks; efficacy beyond this period was not assessed.

Conclusions: Across three trials, lifitegrast improved ICSS in participants with mild-to-moderate baseline symptomatology in two studies, and EDS in participants with moderate-to-severe baseline symptomatology in two studies. Based on the overall findings from these trials, lifitegrast shows promise as a new treatment option for signs and symptoms of DED.     

Evaluation of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing in the management of tinnitus. An observational study

ObjectivesTinnitus can induce disabling psychological suffering, requiring an integrative multimodal approach, combining neuromodulation and psychotherapeutic methods. We sought to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy and acceptability of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) in tinnitus.Materials and methodsThis was a single-center prospective non-comparative study. Inclusion criteria comprised: adult patient, with chronic tinnitus, Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) score > 17, causing psychological distress motivating active treatment after ineffective “classic” treatment (combining advice, sound therapy and first-line drug treatment), and agreement to EMDR therapy. Therapeutic efficacy was defined by a decrease in THI or Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores. Treatment acceptability was defined by the rate of included patients who completed therapy.ResultsThirty-eight patients were included. There was a significant reduction of 53.5% in THI score in 78.9% of patients (P < 0.0001; 64.8 ± 20.8 before versus 31.8 ± 24.7 after treatment), and of 51% in VAS score in 76.3% of patients (P < 0.0001; 7.24 ± 2.12 before versus 3.58 ± 2.03 after treatment). The treatment acceptability was 86.8%.ConclusionEMDR appeared to be an effective alternative that was acceptable to the majority of patients, after failure of “classic” first-line treatment, improving quality of life in tinnitus patients and thus relieving disability.