COMPARATIVE CYTOTOXICITY POTENTIAL OF SOFT CONTACT LENS CARE PRODUCTS

REFERENCES

• Tripathi B, Tripathi R. Cytotoxic effects of benzalkonium chloride and chlorobutanol on human corneal epithelial cells in vitro. Lens Eye Toxic Res 1989; 6(3):395–403. [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE]
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• De Saint Jean M, Brignole F, Bringuier A-F, Bauchet A, Geldmann G, Baudouin C. Effects of benzalkonium chloride on growth and survival of chang conjunctival cells. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1999; 40(3):619–630. [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geerling G, Daniels J, Dart JKG, Cree IA, Khaw PT. Toxicity of natural tear substitutes in a fully defined culture model of human corneal epithelial cells. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2001; 42(5):948–956. [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pham X, Huff JW. Cytotoxicity evaluation of multipurpose contact lens solutions using an in vitro test battery. CLAO J 1999; 25(1):28–35. [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mowery-McKee M, Sills A, Wright A. Comparative cytotoxicity potential of soft contact lens care regimens. CLAO J 2002; 8(3):160–4.
   Google Scholar
• Imperia PS, Lazarus HM, Botti RE, Lass JH. An in-vitro method for measuring ophthalmic preservative cytotoxicity. J Toxicol Cutaneous Ocul Toxicol 1986; 5(4):309–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Debbasch C, Rat P, Warnet JM, de Saint Jean M, Baudouin C, Pisella P-J. Evaluation of the toxicity of benzalkonium chloride on the ocular surface. J Toxicol Cutaneous Ocul Toxicol 2000; 19(2&3):105–15. [CSA]
   Google Scholar
• Chapman J, Cheeks L, Green K. Interactions of benzalkonium chloride with soft and hard contact lenses. Arch Ophthalmol 1990; 108:244–6. [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen MT, Barry JR, Turner FD. Five-minute removal of soft lenses prevents most absorption of a topical ophthalmic solution. CLAO J 1998; 24(4):227–31. [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Havener WH. Wetting agents. In: Havener WH, ed Ocular Pharmacology. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby, 1983:622–34.
   Google Scholar
• Tchao R, McCanna D, Miller M. Comparison of contact lens multipurpose solutions by in vitro sodium fluorescein permeability assay. CLAO J 2002; 28(3):151–6. [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vaughan J, Porter D. A new method for assessing the potential toxicity of soft contact lens care solutions. CLAO J 1993; 19(1):54–7. [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE]
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chiba K, Kawakami K, Tohyama K. Simultaneous evaluation of cell viability by neutral red; MTT and crystal violet staining assays of the same cells. Toxicol in Vitro 1998; 12:251–8. [CSA], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vian L, Vincent J, Maurin J, Fabre I, Giroux J, Cano JP. Comparison of three in vitro cytotoxicity assays for estimating surfactant ocular irritation. Toxicol in Vitro 1995; 9:185–90. [CSA], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yao C, Acosta D. Surfactant cytotoxicity potential evaluated with primary cultures of ocular tissues: a method for the culture of rabbit conjunctival epithelial cells and initial cytotoxicity studies. Toxicol Methods 1992; 2:199–218.
   Google Scholar
• Greil J, Spies T, Boswald M, Bechert T, Lugauer S, Regenfus A, Guggenbichler J-P. Analysis of the acute cytotoxicity of the Erlanger silver catheter. Infection 1999; 27(Suppl):S34–7. [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE]
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lee JK, Kim DB, Kim JI, Kim PU. In vitro cytocoxicity tests on cultured human skin fibroblasts to predict skin irritation potential of surfactants. Toxicol in Vitro 2000; 14:345–9. [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• US Department of Health and Human Service; Food and Drug Administration; Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Toxicology section. Guidance for Industry Premarket Notification (510(k)) Guidance Document for Contact Lens Care Products, May 1, 1997:114.
   Google Scholar
• ISO/FDIS 10993-5: Biological evaluation of medical devices - Part 5: Tests for in vitro cytotoxicity, 1998.
   Google Scholar
• The United States Pharmacopeia 2004; 27:1831–2.
   Google Scholar
• Borenfreund E, Babich H, Martin-Alguacil N. Comparison of two in vitro assays-the neutral red (NR) and tetrazolium MTT tests. Toxicol in Vitro 1988; 2:1–6. [CSA], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borenfreund E, Puerner J. Toxicity determined in vitro by morphological alterations and neutral red absorption. Toxicol Lett 1985; 24:119–24. [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mossman T. Rapid colorimetric assay fro cellular growth and survival: application to proliferation and cytotoxicity assays. J lmmunol Methods 1983; 65:55–63. [CSA], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CellTiter 96® Aqueous One Solution Cell Proliferation Assay. www.promega.com (accessed 9/2004).
   Google Scholar
• Araki-Sasaki K, Ohashi Y, Sasabe T, Hayashi K, Watanabe H, Tano Y, Yanda H. Immortalized human corneal epithelial cell line and its characteristics. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1995; 36(3):614–21. [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuchowicz E, Rydzynski K. Can cytotoxic effects induced by chemicals be time-dependent? 1999; ATLA Abstr27 367–77.
   Google Scholar