Quantitative and conformational characterization of lysozyme deposited on balafilcon and etafilcon contact lens materials

References

• Tighe B. Contact lens materials. In: Phillips A, Speedwell L. Contact Lenses. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann; 1997: 50–92.
   Google Scholar
• Ratner B, Horbett T, Mateo N. Contact lens spoilation - Part 1: Biochemical aspect of lens spoilation. In: Ruben M, Guillon M. Contact Lens Practice. London: Chapman & Hall; 1994:1083–1098.
   Google Scholar
• Sack R, Jones B, Antignani A, Libow R, Harvey H. Speci-ficity and biological activity of the protein deposited on the hydrogel surface. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1987;28:842–849.
   Google Scholar
• Bohnert JL, Horbett TA, Ratner BD, Royce FH. Adsorption of proteins from artificial tear solutions to contact lens materials. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1988;29:362–373.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minno G, Eckel L, Groemminger S, Minno B, Wrzosek T. Quantitative analysis of protein deposits on hydrophilic soft contact lenses: I. Comparison to visual methods of analy-sis. II. Deposit variation among FDA lens material groups. Optom Vis Sci. 1991;68:865–872.
   Google Scholar
• Bontempo AR, Rapp J. Protein and lipid deposition onto hydrophilic contact lenses in vivo. CLAO J. 2001;27:75–80.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Castillo EJ, Koenig JL, Anderson JM, Jentoft N. Protein adsorption on soft contact lenses. III. Mucin. Biomaterials. 1986;7:9–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein AE. Detection of mucin deposits on hydrogel contact lenses: Evaluation of staining procedures and clinical significance. Optom Vis Sci. 1989;66:56–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart D, Tidsale R, Sack R. Origin and composition of lipid deposits on soft contact lenses. Ophthalmol. 1986;93:495–503.
   Google Scholar
• Jones L, Evans K, Sariri R, Franklin V, Tighe B. Lipid and protein deposition of N-vinyl pyrrolidone containing group II and group IV frequent replacement contact lenses. CLAO J. 1997;23:122–126.
   Google Scholar
• Minarik L, Rapp J. Protein deposits on individual hydrophilic contact lenses: Effects of water and ionicity. CLAO J. 1989;15:185–188.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Baines M, Cai F, Backman H. Adsorption and removal of protein bound to hydrogel contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci. 1990;67:807–810.
   Google Scholar
• Gellatly K, Brennan N, Efron N. Visual decrement with deposit accumulation on HEMA contact lenses. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1988;65:937–941.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nilsson S, Andersson L. Contact lens wear in dry environ-ments. Acta Ophthalmol. 1986;64:221–225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pritchard N, Fonn D, Weed K. Ocular and subjective responses to frequent replacement of daily wear soft contact lenses. CLAO J. 1996;22:53–59.
   Google Scholar
• Jones L, Franklin V, Evans K, Sariri R, Tighe B. Spoilation and clinical performance of monthly vs three monthly disposable contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci. 1996;73:16–21.
   Google Scholar
• Bleshoy H, Guillon M, Shah D. Influence of contact lens material surface characteristics on replacement frequency. Int Contact Lens Clin. 1994;21:82–94.
   Google Scholar
• Refojo M, Holly F. Tear protein adsorption on hydrogels: A possible cause of contact lens allergy. Contact Intraoc Lens Med J. 1977;3:23–35.
   Google Scholar
• Porazinski AD, Donshik PC. Giant papillary conjunctivitis in frequent replacement contact lens wearers: A retrospec-tive study. CLAO J. 1999;25:142–147.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kotow M, Holden B, Grant T. The value of regular replacement of low water content contact lenses for extended wear. J Am Optom Assoc. 1986;58:461–464.
   Google Scholar
• Leahy C, Mandell R, Lin S. Initial in vivo tear protein deposition on individual hydrogel contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci. 1990;67:504–511.
   Google Scholar
• Lin S, Mandell R, Leahy C, Newell J. Protein accumulation on disposable extended wear lenses. CLAO J. 1991;17:44–50.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jones L, Mann A, Evans K, Franklin V, Tighe B. An in vivo comparison of the kinetics of protein and lipid deposition on group II and group IV frequent-replacement contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci. 2000;77:503–510.
   Google Scholar
• Fowler S, Korb D, Allansmith M. Deposits on soft contact lenses of various water contents. CLAO J. 1985;11:124–127.
   Google Scholar
• Garrett Q, Laycock B, Garrett RW. Hydrogel lens monomer constituents modulate protein sorption. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:1687–1695.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrett Q, Garrett RW, Milthorpe BK. Lysozyme sorption in hydrogel contact lenses. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999;40:897–903.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrett Q, Griesser HJ, Milthorpe BK, Garrett RW. Irre-versible adsorption of human serum albumin to hydrogel contact lenses: A study using electron spin resonance spectroscopy. Biomaterials. 1999;20:1345–1356.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karageozian H. Use of the amino acid analyzer to illustrate the efficacy of an enzyme preparation for cleaning hydrophilic lenses. Contacto. 1976:5–10.
   Google Scholar
• Wedler F. Analysis of biomaterials deposited on soft contact lenses. J Biomed Mater Res. 1977;11:525–535.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castillo EJ, Koenig JL, Anderson TM, Lo J. Protein adsorp-tion on hydrogels. II. Reversible and irreversible interac-tions between lysozyme and soft contact lens surfaces. Biomaterials. 1985;6:338–345.
   Google Scholar
• Furness EL, Ross A, Davis TP, King GC. A hydrophobic interaction site for lysozyme binding to polyethylene glycol and model contact lens polymers. Biomaterials. 1998; 19:1361–1369.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grant T, Holden B, Rechneberger J, Chong M. Contact lens related papillary conjunctivitis (CLPC): Influence of protein accumulation and replacement frequency. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1989;30(Suppl.):166.
   Google Scholar
• Alvord L, Court J, Davis T, Morgan CF, Schindhelm K, Vogt J, Winterton L. Oxygen permeability of a new type of high Dk soft contact lens material. Optom Vis Sci. 1998;75:30–36.
   Google Scholar
• Nicolson PC, Vogt J. Soft contact lens polymers: An evo-lution. Biomaterials. 2001;22:3273–3283.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lopez-Alemany A, Compan V, Refojo MF. Porous structure of Purevision versus Focus Night&Day and conventional hydrogel contact lenses. J Biomed Mater Res (Appl Biomat). 2002;63:319–325.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fonn D, Pritchard N, Dumbleton K. Factors affecting the success of silicone hydrogels. In: Sweeney D. Silicone Hydrogels: The Rebirth of Continuous Wear Contact Lenses. Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2000;214–234.
   Google Scholar
• McArthur SL, McLean KM, St John HA, Griesser HJ. XPS and surface-MALDI-MS characterisation of worn HEMA-based contact lenses. Biomaterials. 2001;22:3295–3304.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green R, Davies M, Roberts C, Tendler S. Competitive protein adsorption as observed by surface plasmon reso-nance. Biomaterials. 1999;20:385–391.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kingshott P, St John HA, Chatelier RC, Griesser HJ. Matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization mass spectrom-etry detection of proteins adsorbed in vivo onto contact lenses. J Biomed Mater Res. 2000;49:36–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oleschuk RD, McComb ME, Chow A, Ens W, Standing KG, Perreault H, Marois Y, King M. Characterization of plasma proteins adsorbed onto biomaterials. By MALDI-TOFMS. Biomaterials. 2000;21:1701–1710.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhatia S, Goldberg EP, Enns JB. Examination of contact lens surfaces by Atomic Force Microscope (AFM). CLAO J. 1997;23:264–269.
   Google Scholar
• Baguet J, Sommer F, Claudon-Eyl V, Duc TM. Characteri-zation of lacrymal component accumulation on worn soft contact lens surfaces by atomic force microscopy. Bioma-terials. 1995;16:3–9.
   Google Scholar
• Bilbaut T, Gachon A, Dastugue B. Deposits on soft contact lenses. Electrophoresis and scanning electron microscopic examinations. Exp Eye Res. 1986;43:153–165.
   Google Scholar
• Cheng KH, Kok JH, van Mil C, Kijlstra A. Selective binding of a 30-kilodalton protein to disposable hydrophilic contact lenses. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1990;31: 2244–2247.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yan G, Nyquist G, Caldwell K, Payor R, McCraw E. Quantitation of total protein deposits on contact lenses by means of amino acid analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;34:1804–1813.
   Google Scholar
• Wollensak G, Mur E, Mayr A, Baier G, Gottinger W, Stoffler G. Effective methods for the investigation of human tear film proteins and lipids. Graefe Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1990;228:78–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glasson MJ, Molloy MP, Walsh BJ, Willcox MD, Morris CA, Williams KL. Development of mini-gel technology in two-dimensional electrophoresis for mass-screening of samples: Application to tears. Electrophoresis. 1998;19: 852–855.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keith D, Hong B, Christensen M. A novel procedure for the extraction of protein deposits from soft hydrophilic contact lenses for analysis. Curr Eye Res. 1997;16:503–510.
   Google Scholar
• Horbett TA, Weathersby PK. Adsorption of proteins from plasma to a series of hydrophilic-hydrophobic copolymers. I. Analysis with the in situ radioiodination technique. J Biomed Mater Res. 1981;15:403–423.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schein OD, Glynn RJ, Poggio EC, Seddon JM, Kenyon KR. The relative risk of ulcerative keratitis among users of daily-wear and extended-wear soft contact lenses. A case-control study. Microbial Keratitis Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1989;321:773–778.
   Google Scholar
• Christensen M, Keith D, Tudor M, Hong B, Stauffer B. Evaluation of denatured lysozyme removal by two mar-keted multi-purpose solutions. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42: s591.
   Google Scholar
• Senchyna M, Jones L, Forbes I, May C, NM, Sorbara L. The influence of multipurpose care regimens in controlling lysozyme deposition on etafilcon contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci. 2001;78:308.
   Google Scholar
• Jones L, Senchyna M, May C, Forbes I, Sorbara L, MacDougall N. The impact of care regimens on the clini-cal performance of etafilcon contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci. 2003 ;submitted.
   Google Scholar
• Jones L, MacDougall N, Sorbara LG. Asymptomatic corneal staining associated with the use of balafilcon sili-cone-hydrogel contact lenses disinfected with a polyamino-propyl biguanide-preserved care regimen. Optom Vis Sci. 2002;79:753–761.
   Google Scholar
• Scott G, Mowrey-McKee M. Dimerization of tear lysozymeon hydrophilic contact lens polymers. Curr Eye Res. 1996;15:461–466.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franklin V. Cleaning efficacy of single-purpose surfactant cleaners and multi-purpose solutions. Contact Lens & Anterior Eye. 1997;20:63–68.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Garrett Q, Chatelier RC, Griesser HJ, Milthorpe BK. Effect of charged groups on the adsorption and penetration of proteins onto and into carboxymethylated poly(HEMA) hydrogels. Biomaterials. 1998;19:2175–2186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNally J, McKenney CD. A clinical look at a silicone hydrogel extended wear lens. Contact Lens Spectrum. 2002;17:38–41.
   Google Scholar
• Court JL, Redman RP, Wang JH, Leppard SW, Obyrne VJ, Small SA, Lewis AL, Jones SA, Stratford PW. A novel phosphorylcholine-coated contact lens for extended wear use. Biomaterials. 2001;22:3261–3272.
   Google Scholar
• Tighe B. Silicone hydrogel materials - How do they work? In: Sweeney D. Silicone Hydrogels: The Rebirth of Con-tinuous Wear Contact Lenses. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2000:1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Grobe G, Kunzler J, Seelye D, Salamone J. Silicone hydro-gels for contact lens applications. Polymeric Materials Science and Engineering. 1999;80:108–109.
   Google Scholar
• Mirejovsky D, Patel AS, Rodriguez DD. Effect of proteins on water and transport properties of various hydro-gel contact lens materials. Curr Eye Res. 1991;10:187–196.
   Google Scholar
• Sack RA, Sathe S, Hackworth LA, Willcox MD, Holden BA, Morris CA. The effect of eye closure on protein and complement deposition on Group IV hydrogel contact lenses: Relationship to tear flow dynamics. Curr Eye Res. 1996;15:1092–1100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wedler F, Illman B, Horensky D, Mowrey-McKee M. Analy-sis of protein and mucin components deposited on hydrophilic contact lenses. Clin Exp Optom. 1987;70:59–68.
   Google Scholar
• Bruinsma GM, van der Mei HC, Busscher HJ. Bacterial adhesion to surface hydrophilic and hydrophobic contact lenses. Biomaterials. 2001;22:3217–3224.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brash J. Modern aspects of protein adsorption on biomate-rials. In: Missilis Y, Lemm W Dordrecht: Kluwer Acade-mic Publishers; 1991:39–48.
   Google Scholar
• Andrade J. Protein adsorption, surface and interfacial aspects of biomedical polymers. In. New York: Plenum Press; 1985:1–88.
   Google Scholar
• Horbett T. Protein adsorption to hydrogels. In: Peppas N. Hydrogels in Medicine and Pharmacy. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 1986:127–171.
   Google Scholar
• Norde W. Adsorption of proteins from solution at the solid-liquid interface. Adv Colloid Interface Sci. 1986;25:267–340.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norde W, Anusiem A. Adsorption, desorption and re-adsorption of proteins on solid surfaces. Colloids & Surfaces. 1992;66:73–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allansmith M, Korb D, Greiner J, Henruquez A, Simon M, Finnemore V. Giant papillary conjunctivitis in contact lens wearers. Am J Ophthalmol. 1977;83:697–708.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skotnitsky C, Sankaridurg PR, Sweeney DF, Holden BA. General and local contact lens induced papillary conjunctivitis (CLPC). Clin Exp Optom. 2002;85:193–197.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sweeney D, Keay L, Jalbert I, Sankaridurg P, Holden B, Skotnitsky C, Stephensen A, Covey M, Rao G. Clinical per-formance of silicone hydrogel lenses. In: Sweeney D. Silicone Hydrogels. The Rebirth of Continuous Wear Contact Lenses. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2000: 90–149.
   Google Scholar
• Lebow K, Christensen B. Cleaning efficacy and patient comfort: a clinical comparison of two contact lens care systems. Int Contact Lens Clin. 1996;23:87–92.
   Google Scholar
• Christensen B, Lebow K, White E, Cedrone R, Bevington R. Effectiveness of citrate-containing lens care regimens: a controlled clinical comparison. Int Contact Lens Clin. 1998;25:50–57.
   Google Scholar