Lupine Publishers | Comparison of Invasive & Non-Invasive Tear Break up Time Measurement Techniques in Contact Lens Users

 Lupine Publishers | Trends in Ophthalmology Open Access Journal 

Abstract

Purpose: To compare invasive and non-invasive techniques for measuring tear break-up time (TBUT) in contact lens users.

Methodology: Comparison of invasive and non-invasive TBUT was done on a sample of 30 contact lens users (60eyes) ages limit from 15 to 30 years of females at Department of Ophthalmology, Madinah Teaching Hospital (MTH) Faisalabad by applying non probability convenient sampling technique. This descriptive cross sectional study was completed in duration of 6 months from October 2018 to March; 2018. An appropriate informed consent was taken from each participant under study. Video keratograph and Bausch and Lomb keratometer were used to measure non-invasive tear break up time. Flourescein tear break up time was performed by Slit Lamp using flourscein strip. Averages of three readings were recorded of each technique to ensure accuracy. Data was analyzed by One-way ANOVA test in SPSS software version 20.

Results: There is insignificant difference between invasive and non-invasive TBUT technique at level of 5% confidence interval.

Conclusion: There is no significant difference between values of invasive and non invasive tear break up time. Each of three techniques can be applied for measuring tear film stability.

Keywords: Tear break-up time; TBUT; Invasive; Non-invasive; Keratometer; Video keratograph; Contact lens users

Introduction

Tear film is transparent liquiform coating that overlies cornea and conjunctiva. It has a trilaminar arrangement with an outlying lipid, an intermediary aqueous and the inner most mucous layer. Cornea is transparent optical refracting medium that lies immediately beneath tear film. Tear film spreads over corneal epithelium with each blink. Tear film and cornea are in mutual relationship confirming each other’s integrity. A healthy tear film significantly contributes to provide regular, smooth optical interface by filling corneal surface irregularities. A vascular cornea mainly counts on tear film for nutrition. Tear film absorbs environmental oxygen supplying it to cornea. Moreover, vital nutrient glucose seeps into the tear film through palpebral conjunctival vessels, from where it is supplied to cornea [1].

A stable tear film is representative of consistency and integrity of tear film. Assessment of tear film stability provides information about dynamic behavior of tear film. Tear film destabilizes in a specific time period following a blink. Early destabilization of tear film is indicative of tear film instability which can result in dry eye [2]. Many factors affect tear film stability including senile changes, ocular conditions like blephritis, meibomian gland dysfunction or any primary ocular surface disorder, hormonal changes, drugs like contraceptives, anticholinergic, antidepressants, antipsychotics, vitamin A deficiency, environmental changes and use of contact lenses [3]. Stable tear-film is fundamental necessity for successful contact lens usage. CL splits tear film in pre-lens and post lens segments affecting its biochemical and biophysical properties. Contact lens placement mainly interrupts lipid layer of tear film, rendering a thinner lipid phase pre-lens segment of tear film due to which evaporation occurs earlier irrespective of contact lens material [3] Tear BUT mechanism with contact lens is different as compared to tear-breakup time mechanism of tear film without contact lens. Contact lens mainly disorganize lipid layer as polar components of lipid layer show more affinity towards contact lens surface. Thinning of lipid layer increases evaporation rate which leads to tear film instability [4].

Furthermore increased phospholipase level has been reported in contact lens user’s tear film. It causes oxidation and degradation of phospholipids which in turn leads to lysophospholipids and diacylglycerides production. These are highly unsaturated and unstable. Hence earlier disruption of lipid layer occurs, reducing tear film stability [5]. Thus tear film stability measurement signifies its role as an imperative investigation procedure especially in contact lens users.

Materials and Methods

A description cross-sectional study with sample of 60 eyes of 30 females’ subjects was conducted at Department of Ophthalmology, Madinah Teaching Hospital (MTH) Faisalabad in months of October 2018 to March 2018. Female contact lens users, belonging to age group from 15 to 30 years were recruited through non probability convenient sampling technique. Any subject with corneal or conjunctival disease, traumatic or drug and surgical history were excluded. Pregnant ladies and with astigmatism higher than ±0.75D were also excluded. After taking consent and complete history of ocular and systemic diseases, surgery and contact lens use the following procedure was applied in succeeding order on all subjects (Figures 1 & 2).

Non-invasive TBUT measured through video keratograph, Galile 4 (ziemer). In this technique mires was projected on ocular surface &focused clearly. Subject was asked after one complete blink to stop blinking. Examiner observes mires and elapsing seconds were counted until mires become distorted or diffused. Procedure was repeated and average of three readings was recorded as non-invasive tear breakup time (NITBUT) by video keratograph. Non-invasive tear breakup time was also measured using manual Bausch & Lomb keratometer (Topcon OM-4). Circular mires were focused clearly and subject was asked to stop blink after one complete blink. Mires were observed and time was recorded in seconds using stopwatch until distortion. Procedure was repeated thrice and an average was recorded as non-invasive Tear breakup time by keratometer.

Standard invasive method for tear breakup time measurement was performed at last because instillation of fluorecein may affect the values of NITBUT. Fluorescein strip was gently touched in upper conjunctiva to stain tear film. This stained tear was recognized through slit lamp, using cobalt filter and wide beam under low magnification (6X-10X). Post-blink time taken for the first black spot appear in green dyed tear film was considered. Three recordings were taken and an average considered as invasive fluorescein tear breakup time (FTBUT). The measurements obtained binocularly from each subject were expressed as mean standard deviation. The analysis was done by entering whole data into the software of SPSS version 20 by ANOVA test.

Results

Comparison of an invasive fluorescein tear break up time (FTBUT) technique to two non invasive tear breakup time (NITBUT) techniques was performed on 60 eyes of 30 female contact lens users of age 15-30 years. Mean value of video keratograph tear break up time (VK TBUT) of right eye is 7.807±2.965 sec, mean value of keratometer tear break up time (KM TBUT) of right eye is 7.797±2.981 sec and mean value of flourescein tear break up time (FTBUT) of right eye is 6.656±1.675 sec, which is less as compared to non-invasive TBUT values.

Mean value of video keratograph tear break up time (VK TBUT) of left eye is 8.042±3.454 sec, mean value of keratometer tear break up time (KM TBUT) of left eye is 7.744±2.847 sec and mean value of flourescein tear break up time (FTBUT) of left eye is 6.285±2.057 sec and is less as compared to non-invasive TBUT values. Comparison of mean values of tear break up time (TBUT) obtained by applying ANOVA analysis, shows that significance value for right eye data is 0.164 and for left eye data is 0.297 which is greater than 0.05 and therefore, there is no statistically significant difference between mean values of all the three techniques.

Discussion

Purpose of conducting this study was to compare invasive and non-invasive techniques to measure TBUT among contact lens users as contact lens strongly alter tear film and its components. Results showed there is no such significant difference between either. A study by Jeong et al. [6] on two groups one with eye dry subjects other was control group was organized to see the difference between keratograph and flourescein tear break up time. Similar to our study, they stated that there is no difference between invasive and non-invasive tear break up time (r=0.66, p<0.001) and (r=0.77, p<0.001).

Hong et al. [7] conducted a prospective study on 44 patients of dry eye and 41 normal subjects and performed one non-invasive technique and flourescein strips, schirmer 1 and inferior tear meniscus height as invasive technique. Results depicted there is significant difference between non-invasive tear break up time and invasive tear break up time. Contrary to this, present study disagreed as there is no significant difference. They use different methods for invasive tear break up time and their study was on two groups one with dry eye and one group was healthy. Johnson and Murphy published a study in which there was no difference between two methods for instillation of flourescein by micropipette and flourescein strips. They conclude that flourecein volume affects the tear film dynamics [8]. Likewise in our study we only used the flouresein strips with same concentration to avoid the effect of flouresein volume.

On the other hand, a study performed on two separate groups i.e. group 1 (control) and group 2(dry eye) showed there is significant difference between invasive and non-invasive procedures. Corneal topographer as non-invasive and break up time and schirmer 1 test used as invasive tear break up time. The non-invasive tear break up time was lower than invasive tear break up time in both groups and concluded that non-invasive is good method for diagnosis of dry eye [9,10]. While our study was performed on same group of contact lens users and flourescein strips with slit lamp as invasive method.

Conclusion

The research revealed that values of invasive tear break up time and non-invasive tear break up time measured through video keratograph and Bausch and Lomb keratometer, have no significant difference in contact lens users. Each of the three techniques can be applied for measuring tear film stability. It is concluded that noninvasive techniques are theoretically and practically more sound for assessment of tear film stability in cases where fluorescein is contraindicated i-e pregnant women, asthmatic patients, history of allergies etc. Non- invasive techniques should be procedure of choice for investigating tear break up time in soft contact lens users to avoid deposits and staining of soft contact lens.

 https://lupinepublishers.com/ophthalmology-journal/pdf/TOOAJ.MS.ID.000118.pdf

https://lupinepublishers.com/ophthalmology-journal/fulltext/comparison-of-invasive-non-invasive-tear-break-up-time-measurement-techniques-in-contact-lens-users.ID.000118.php 

For more Lupine Publishers Open Access Journals Please visit our website: https://lupinepublishersgroup.com/

For more Trends in Ophthalmology Please Click

Here: https://lupinepublishers.com/ophthalmology-journal/

To Know more Open Access Publishers Click on Lupine Publishers

Follow on Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/company/lupinepublishers
Follow on Twitter   :  https://twitter.com/lupine_online

Lupine Publishers | Treatment Of Idiopathic Choroidal Neovascular Membrane in Young Female Patient by Intravitreal Aflibercept Injection

 Lupine Publishers | Trends in Ophthalmology Open Access Journal 

Abstract

This case is about idiopathic choroidal neovascular membrane (CNV) in a 30 year old female patient who presented with visual loss in the right eye for one month. The initial vision acuity (VA) of the patient was 1/10. In the fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) of the patient, staining and macular leakage consistent with CNV in the peripapillary region were detected. Intravitreal injection of aflibercept was performed on the patient’s eye. At the first month follow-up, the patient’s VA was 10/10.

Abbrevations: CNV: Choroidal Neovascular Membrane; VA: Vision Acuity; OCT: Optical Coherence Tomography; FFA: Fundus Fluorescein Angiography

Introduction

In patients younger than 50 years, CNV usually develops due to secondary causes such as trauma, angioid streaks, inflammation, pathologic myopia, ocular histoplasmosis [1]. Apart from this, some young patients develop CNV without any reason. This group is called idiopathic CNV [2]. CNV in these patients respond better to treatment than age related macular degeneration[3]. In the literature, idiopathic CNV has been reported in a small number of young patients[4]. This report is about a case in which a 30 years old young healthy patient with idiopathic CNV responded well to intravitreal aflibercept treatment.

Case report

The patient who was 30 years old female applied to our clinic with loss of vision in the right eye. The initial VA was 1/10. The patient was not traumatized or had any disease story. Visual acuity was normal in the patient’s left eye. There was not any pathology in the anterior segment of the patient. In the posterior segment of the right eye, the peripapillary resemble the CNV like appearance and hemorrhage was observed under the retina. Left eye was normal. In the FFA of the patient, peripapillary region-compatible CNV staining was observed in the late period (Figure 1). In OCT, CNV and subretinal fluid of the macula were detected (Figure 2). On this basis, all blood tests, serologies and chest radiographs of the patient were drawn to distinguish possible inflammatory causes. There was not any inflammatory pathology in the results. Intravitreal injection of aflibercept was applied to the patient for treatment. On the first month of treatment the patient was found to have vision 10/10 and the OCT showed decreased fluid. The patient received a second dose of aflibercept. At the second month of treatment the patient was found to have visual impairment 10/10 and no fluid in OCT (Figure 3). At the 6th month of the visit, vision is still at 10/10, and no fluid is found in OCT.

 

Discussion

There are many reasons in the etiology of CNV, but the underlying pathology of these causes is the defect in the bruch’s membrane. A good biomicroscopic examination and all laboratory tests should be performed to distinguish the etiologic causes of the patient. Despite all this, no systemic disease or vitreous retinal pathology could be detected. There are several case reports of idiopathic CNV in the current literature [5,6]. There are options in current treatment of CNV such as ocular photodynamic therapy, thermal laser therapy and anti-vascular endothelial growth hormone (anti-VEBF). Mandal et al. they performed intravitreal bevacizumab injection in a report of 32 eyes with idiopathic CNV patients and 19 of them had improved VA [7]. Carreno E et al. [8] have demonstrated the efficacy of intravitreal ranibizumab in patients with idiopathic CNV. In this case, we wanted to demonstrate the efficacy of aflibercept injection in patient with idiopathic peripapillary CNV. While the initial VA of the patient with acute visual loss was 1/10, the VA after the first injection was 10/10, but the subretinal fluid persisted in OCT. After the second dose of aflibercept injection, the patient’s VA was maintained at 10/10, whereas there was not any subretinal fluid in the OCT. The patient was not injected with a third dose. The final VA at the 6th month was found to be 10/10 and no subretinal fluid was found in OCT.

Conclusion

In conclusion, intravitreal aflibercept injection was found to be effective in the patient with idiopathic CNV. Prospective and randomized clinical trials are needed to better understand efficacy of aflibercept treatment in the idiopathic CNV

 

https://lupinepublishers.com/ophthalmology-journal/pdf/TOOAJ.MS.ID.000116.pdf

https://lupinepublishers.com/ophthalmology-journal/fulltext/treatment-of-idiopathic-choroidal-neovascular-membrane-in-young-female-patient-by-intravitreal-aflibercept-injection.ID.000116.php

For more Lupine Publishers Open Access Journals Please visit our website: https://lupinepublishersgroup.com/

For more Trends in Ophthalmology Please Click

Here: https://lupinepublishers.com/ophthalmology-journal/

To Know more Open Access Publishers Click on Lupine Publishers 

Follow on Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/company/lupinepublishers
Follow on Twitter   :  https://twitter.com/lupine_online

Lupine Publishers | Misstatements About Time

Lupine Publishers | Trends in Ophthalmology Open Access Journal 

Abstract

The theory of time starts usefully by a prior inventory of the main mistakes that are commonly made, such as the pleonasms, the confusion between events and time, the duration of the present, the use of metaphors, time considered a cause of diseases and aging, time considered a phenomenon instead of a concept.

Pleonasms

Time is often defined by duration and, in the wake, duration is defined by time. These are fallacies, because time and duration denote the same concept, and they are both expressed with the same units.

Time and duration are semantic nuances of the same concept; therefore the one can’t be used to define the other.

Confusion Between Events And Time

Past, present, future does not teach us anything, because in the usual way of speaking, these three terms are commonly used to refer to events, rather than time, e.g., past means past events. As a matter of fact, past time does not mean anything, insofar as we do not know the meaning of the word time. The Latin poet Horace (68-8 BC) [1] mocked the old man who praises past time (laudator temporis acti); of course, Horace meant past life or past events, instead of past time as such. The Latin poet Ovid (43 BC-18 AD) [2] rejoiced: Others praise the past; for myself, I am pleased to be born in this century. The Latin historian Tacitus [3] used the expression succession of times instead of succession of events. However, this basic distinction between time and event is not taken into account, probably due to the persuasive habits of everyday language.

History tells of events, not time. The Greek historian Diodorus of Sicily (c.90-30) [4] stressed the fact that history has valuable lessons to teach us: the history that Diodorus was talking about concerned past events and present events, rather than past time and present time. The Greek founder of historical science Thucydides (c.465-c.395) [5] observed the conflict which opposed Athena and Sparta from 431 to 404 BC, pulled into conflict by their various alliances. He did not study present time, but present events. He followed the sequence of events in order to understand, and to accomplish his work as a historian. During one of his famous speeches Pericles (495-429) warned the audience; […] the events of war are uncertain [5]: Pericles did not refer to times of war.

The French word avenir (from Latin advenire: to arrive) is selfcontradicting if it is translated by future events, because future events do not exist. Forecasters try to predict future events, i.e. their predictions refer to events rather than time. The word fatum (fate, destiny) names the belief according to which the future, including even the most inconsequential events, is written or decided in advance. Pericles observed that people thought fate was the cause of their failures. We can easily determine future time, but not futur events. For example, it is possible to calculate what day will be April 12, 2076, but it’s impossible to predict the value of the Dow Jones index as well as what is going to happen in Outer Mongolia that day. The confusion between the events and time has disastrous consequences, espacially with the use of innumerable metaphors.

Duration of the Present

In a conference hold in 1911, Bergson [6] described the present, as a duration thickness located between our immediate past and our imminent future. The philosopher did not explain what a duration thickness was. Perhaps he did not understand that thickness is a spatial concept and that past, present, and future have to do with events, not time. In Le temps et sa flèche [7], Michel Paty points out that the philosopher Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947) thought that a duration had a temporal thickness (1919). In the same work, J. M. Lévy-Leblond claims that there is a width and a thickness between future and past. There is something strange about the idea that the present should have duration:

a) Either the present designates a present event, in which case the duration of the present is given by a stopwatch.

b) Or the present designates the present time; but the duration of the present time is a pleonasm of the first order.

Use of Metaphors

All metaphors are misleading; their use in physics must be restricted because they don’t allow one to demonstrate anything. On the contrary, they are the source of many errors:

a. Time flies is a metaphor commonly used. It supposes that time has a velocity ; but the velocity of time related to time is a sophism, which has no place in a physical theory.

b. The arrow of time [7] means that time is physically oriented like a vector in mathematics.

Instead, it’s the events that are oriented; time is a scalar.

The arrow of time is a consequence of the confusion between events and time.

Cause of Deseases and Aging

An investigation carried out by Reinberg and Halberg about people suffering from brain death in France between 1962 and 1967 observed a greater fragility during winter seasons [8]. Jacques Attali takes this as an action of time on individuals, whereas in fact there is no action of time, merely a seasonal climatic impact. Thucydides avoided this mistake, when he talked about the season, in August, during which people’s health grows weaker [5]. His translator Denis Roussel notes that physicians of the Côs School (that of Hippocrates c.460-c.377 BC) were taking the influence of climate and seasons into account. The aging of the skin is not caused by time: wrinkles result from the action of sun rays and a lack of protection. The proof is that in some areas, young people can be wrinkled.

Time Considered a Phenomenon Instead a Concept

A phenomenon is characterized by physical properties. In a certain way, experiences can be done on it: for example it can be observed and measured. In L’évolution créatrice, Bergson [9] asserted that time was a flux, but on the following page, declared that time was a kind of force. However, flux and force are mutually exclusive; it is either one or the other, or else it is neither. Bergson did not describe the nature of the flux; furthermore the qualifier “kind of” is never used in physics. The German philosopher Martin Heidegger [10] postulated the existence of time and the phenomenology of time. He thought of time as a being, and confused time, events, and historiality; he wondered why the flux of time could not be reversed. Despite his baroque phraseology, Heidegger has never been able to explain the nature of time.

A concept is the idea that one has about a phenomenon. It is therefore a construction of the mind. A concept has no physical properties, so it does not exist physically, and it is neither observable nor measurable. The Greek historian Plutarch (c.50- 125) [11] emphasized the effectiveness of an explanation drawn from a principle of nature. Thus we observe the movement of the Sun, which is a phenomenon, rather than the day and the year, which are concepts. Remember the erratic values of the year. For example, in Song II of the Odyssey Homer [12] wrote : when the fourth year came, and when the seasons began again. According to this verse, four years are equal to four season; therefore, during the 8th century BC the year had three months in Greece.

Conclusion

Time is not a natural phenomenon; instead, it’s a concept. In other words, time does not physically exist. The thorough study of geo historical origins allows one to demonstrate that time was invented; An invention of thought. Ultimately, it opens the way to the theorization of time [13,14]

 

https://lupinepublishers.com/ophthalmology-journal/pdf/TOOAJ.MS.ID.000115.pdf
https://lupinepublishers.com/ophthalmology-journal/fulltext/misstatements-about-time.ID.000115.php

For more Lupine Publishers Open Access Journals Please visit our website: https://lupinepublishersgroup.com/

For more Trends in Ophthalmology Please Click

Here: https://lupinepublishers.com/ophthalmology-journal/

To Know more Open Access Publishers Click on Lupine Publishers

Follow on Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/company/lupinepublishers
Follow on Twitter   :  https://twitter.com/lupine_online