An Unusual Corneal Complication of Soft Contact Lens

Horowitz, Greg; Lin, Junica; Chew, Helson C.

doi:10.1016/s0002-9394(14)73369-0

Cited by 14 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…27 Several risk factors have been proposed: (1) CL wearer characteristics (e.g., steep corneas, tight upper eyelid, male gender, and presbyopia), and (2) lens design characteristics (e.g., lathe-cut hydrogel lenses, rigid or thick materials, monocurve design, and plus lenses). 21,[27][28][29] Two main hypotheses regarding the cause of SEALs point to a combination of lens design (back surface and edge), lens material, lens surface, and corneal topography as the primary factors that lead to the development of SEALs. 19 However, one study found no significant difference in the central corneal curvature between the SEAL and non-SEAL groups, but that poorer wettability and tighter fitting lenses established at baseline in the SEAL group lead to greater shear forces in the superior cornea during EW compared with the non-SEAL group.…”

Section: Superior Epithelial Arcuate Lesionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanical Complications Induced by Silicone Hydrogel Contact Lenses

Lin

Yeh

2013

Eye &Amp; Contact Lens: Science &Amp; Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Superior Epithelial Arcuate Lesionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanical Complications Induced by Silicone Hydrogel Contact Lenses

Lin

Yeh

2013

Eye &Amp; Contact Lens: Science &Amp; Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Some contact lenses can cause crescentic harm superiorly on the upper cornea, for example superior epithelial arcuate lesion (SEAL; Fig. 1b) 9 and other superior ‘edge shapes’ 10,11 . In these cases, a tight upper lid may be a causative factor 10 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1b) 9 and other superior ‘edge shapes’ 10,11 . In these cases, a tight upper lid may be a causative factor 10 . In contact lens‐induced SLK (CL‐SLK), toxicity from contact lens solutions may predispose to the condition by lowering the threshold for microtrauma.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Blink‐related microtrauma: when the ocular surface harms itself

Cher

2003

Clinical Exper Ophthalmology

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Superior limbic keratoconjunctivitis results mechanically from blinking under prolonged unphysiological conditions. The pathogenic process is known as blink‐related microtrauma. This review aimed to explore the validity of a general theory that besides superior limbic keratoconjunctivitis, there may be other diseases of the ocular surface arising from mechanical microtrauma. A review of relevant clinical and microscopic lesions in a range of ocular surface disorders with possible mechanical aetiology was conducted. New terms were selected to facilitate understanding of such new aetiology. Besides superior limbic keratoconjunctivitis, other ocular surface disorders regarded as primarily derived from blink microtrauma are: other filamentary keratitides; blepharospasm and severe ptosis; canthal/palpebral froth; affections from disordered eyelid lining; and contact lens related damage. A group of secondarily microtraumatic disorders was identified, including the example of microtrauma impacting upon interpalpebral bulbar prominences. Superior limbic keratoconjunctivitis is the archetype of diseases affecting a unique combination; namely, the ocular surface conjoined with its lacrimal fluid. It is only one among many diseases actively generated within the confines of ‘a self‐harming surface’.

show abstract

“…Often corneal lesions are being formed before there is recognizable irritation or decreased vision. Several investigators have reported severe corneal complications in eyes with contact lenses, although not all of them are connected with fungal infections Margulies and Mannis (1983), Bloomfield et al (1984), Horowitz et al (1985), Lemb and Gold (1986) and Wilson et al (1986) state that clinical conditions such as corneal ulcers and irritation of the cornea, in addition to cloudy contact lenses, are problems related to fungal infection. In conclusion it can be said that fungal infection of contact lenses not only leads to rejection of the lens, but at an early stage also endangers the quality and function of the cornea.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fungal growth on soft contact lenses: A SEM-study

Jongebloed

Humalda

Worst³

1987

Doc Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three soft contact lenses of the HEMA type, discarded because of irritation of the cornea, were processed for and subsequently examined with the SEM, A large portion of the convex surface was covered with globular deposits of fungal spores. Cross-fractures of lenses showed penetration of the fungi into the matrix material of the lenses. The concave surface of the contact lenses showed at two points imprints of the epithelial cells of the cornea in the deposited material on that side of the lenses.

show abstract

An Unusual Corneal Complication of Soft Contact Lens

Cited by 14 publications

References 4 publications

Mechanical Complications Induced by Silicone Hydrogel Contact Lenses

Mechanical Complications Induced by Silicone Hydrogel Contact Lenses

Blink‐related microtrauma: when the ocular surface harms itself

Fungal growth on soft contact lenses: A SEM-study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About