Flaremetric evaluation of blood-aqueous barrier breakdown in diabetic patients after phacoemulsification and intraocular lenses with or without heparin-coated surface implantation Artykuł oryginalny
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstrakt
Background: This study compared the intensity of blood-aqueous barrier breakdown in diabetic patients after phacoemulsification with heparin surface-modified and non-modified intraocular lens (IOL) implantation.
Material and methods: In this prospective trial, 68 diabetic patients were enrolled and divided into two groups: 33 patients with heparin surface-modified IOL implants (group 1) and 35 patients with standard hydrophobic IOL implants (group 2). Blood-aqueous barrier breakdown was assessed using a Laser Flare Meter 1 day, 7 days, 14 days, 1 month, and 3 months postoperatively.
Results: On postoperative days 1 and 7, the mean flare value was significantly higher in group 2 compared with group 1. On day 14, the mean flare value in both groups was similar and then higher in group 2.
Conclusions: The implantation of foldable heparin-coated IOLs led to a lower intensity and faster recovery of blood-aqueous barrier breakdown postoperatively.
Pobrania
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa – Użycie niekomercyjne – Bez utworów zależnych 4.0 Międzynarodowe.
Copyright: © Medical Education sp. z o.o. License allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.
Address reprint requests to: Medical Education, Marcin Kuźma (marcin.kuzma@mededu.pl)
Bibliografia
2. Langwińska-Wośko E, Rowiński M, Bełzecka-Majszyk A et al. Soczewki wewnątrzgałkowe tylnokomorowe – przegląd asortymentu ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem soczewek zwijalnych. Okulistyka. 2001; 3: 17-22.
3. Huang Q, Cheng GP, Chiu K, et al. Surface Modification of Intraocular Lenses. Chin Med J. 2016; 129: 206‑14.
4. Kang S, Kim M-J. Comparison of clinical results between heparin surface modified hydrophilic acrylic and hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lens. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2008; 18(3): 377-83.
5. Sawa M. Laser flare-cell photometer: principle and significance in clinical and basic ophthalmology. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2017; 61(1): 21-42.
6. Ladas JG, Wheeler NC, Morhun PJ et al. Laser flare-cell photometry: methodology and clinical applications. Surv Ophthalmol. 2005; 50(1): 27-47.
7. Percival P. Use of heparin-modified lenses in high-risk case for uveitis. Dev Ophthalmol. 1991; 22: 80-3.
8. Sanders DR, Kraft M. Steroidal and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents; effect on postsurgical inflammation and blood-aqueous humor barrier breakdown. Arch Ophthalmol. 1984; 102(10): 1453-6.
9. Philipson B, Fagerholm P, Calel B et al. Heparin surface modified intraocular lenses. Three-month follow-up a randomized, double- masked clinical trial. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1992; 71-8.
10. Jurowski P. Ocena czynników stabilizujących struktury wewnątrzgałkowe przed urazem termicznym w czasie pracy fakoemulsyfikatora w badaniach doświadczalnych u królików. Rozprawa habilitacyjna. 1997.
11. Jurowski P. Rola tlenku azotu w regulacji biochemicznych procesów wewnątrzgałkowych. Okulistyka. 1998, 1: 38-40.
12. Jurowski P, Goś R, Piasecka G. Nitric oxide levels in aqueous humor after lens extraction and poly(methyl methacrylate) and foldable acrylic intraocular lens implantation in rabbit eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002; 28(12): 2188-92.
13. Tang J, Kern TS. Inflammation in diabetic retinopathy. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2011; 30(5): 343-58.
14. Del Vecchio PJ, Bizios R, Holleran LA et al. Inhibition of human scleral fibroblast proliferation with heparin. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1988; 29: 1272-6.
15. Tognetto D, Ravalico G. Inflammatory cell adhesion and surface defects on heparin-surface-modified poly(methyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses in diabetic patients. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001; 27(2): 239-44.
16. Liu T, Hu AH, Hu QJ et al. Objective assessment of the inflammatory reaction in foldable heparin surface-modified hydrophilic acrylic intraocular lens. Int Eye Sci. 2016; 16(1): 11-3.
17. Ravalico G, Tognetto D, Baccara F. Heparin surface modified intraocular lens implantation in eye with pseudoexfoliation syndrome. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1994; 20(5): 543-9.
18. Shah SM, Spalton DJ. Comparison of the postoperative inflammatory response in the normal eye with heparin Surface-modified and poly (methyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1995; 21(5): 579-85.
19. Mester U, Strauss M, Grewing R. Biocompatibility and blood-aqueous barrier impairment in at-risk eyes with heparin-surface-modified or unmodified lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1998; 24(3): 380-4.
20. Pande M, Shah SM, Spalton DJ. Correlations between aqueous flare and cells and lens surface cytology in eyes with poly(methyl methacrylate) and heparin-surface-modified intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1995; 21(3): 326-30.
21. Krall EM, Arlt EM, Jell G et al. Intraindividual aqueous flare comparison after implantation of hydrophobic intraocular lenses with or without a heparin-coated surface. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014; 40(8): 1363-70.