Symptoms and Satisfaction Levels Associated with Intraocular Lens Implants in the Monofocal and Premium IOL Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Study.

PURPOSE: To develop a questionnaire with standardized questions and images about visual symptoms and satisfaction administered before and after cataract surgery with monofocal and various (premium) intraocular lenses (IOLs). DESIGN: A prospective, observational study of cataract surgery patients completing a self-administered questionnaire preoperatively and postoperatively at 4 to 6 months. PARTICIPANTS: Five hundred fifty-four patients with plans to undergo implantation of the same IOL in both eyes on separate occasions in 20 ophthalmology practices. METHODS: An 86-item questionnaire with standardized images assessed the following 14 symptoms: glare, blurry vision, starbursts, hazy vision, snowballs, halos, floaters, double images, rings and spider webs, light flashes with eyes closed, distortion, light flashes with eyes open, shimmering images, and dark crescent-shaped shadows. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Symptom severity and level of symptom bother, satisfaction with vision, quality of vision, and ability to see without corrective lenses or eyeglasses. RESULTS: Except for dark crescent-shaped shadows, the report of visual symptoms significantly decreased postoperatively. Best uncorrected binocular visual acuity improved from 0.47 (20/59 Snellen visual acuity values) ± 0.35 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) preoperatively to 0.12 (20/26 Snellen visual acuity values) ± 0.12 logMAR postoperatively. Patients' ratings of intermediate vision as good to excellent improved significantly from 12% preoperatively to 71% postoperatively, and patients' ratings of distance vision improved from 8% preoperatively to 85% postoperatively. After surgery, 84% reported that they were somewhat, very, or completely satisfied with their vision. Most patients (88%) reported that they could see pretty well, very well, or perfectly well without corrective lenses after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The Assessment of IntraOcular Lens Implant Symptoms questionnaire can be used across a wide variety of IOLs to evaluate visual symptoms and satisfaction with a growing segment of the market, premium IOLs, that target intermediate and near vision, in addition to distance vision. Compared to patients receiving monofocal IOLs, patients receiving premium IOLs appear to be more challenging to satisfy because of their requirements for distance, intermediate, and near vision, and their desire to be free of eyeglasses postoperatively. This instrument provides a structured, uniform tool for regulators, researchers, and ophthalmologists in everyday practice to gain insights into patients' experiences. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

Development of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure to Assess Symptoms Associated with Cataract Surgery and Intraocular Lens Implants.

PURPOSE: To develop a standardized patient-reported outcome measure of visual perceptions and symptoms for implanted premium and monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs). DESIGN: Observational study before and after IOL implants to assess the measure and symptom experience. PARTICIPANTS: Adults scheduled for binocular implantation of the same IOL type completed the survey at baseline prior to surgery (n = 716) and postoperatively (n = 554). Most respondents were female (64%), White (81%), 61 or older (89%), and had some college or more education (62%). METHODS: Administration was by web survey with mail follow-up and phone reminders. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Frequency, severity, and level of symptom bother in the last 7 days for 14 symptoms: (1) glare, (2) hazy vision, (3) blurry vision, (4) starbursts, (5) halos, (6) snowballs, (7) floaters, (8) double images, (9) rings and spider webs, (10) distortion, (11) light flashes with eyes closed, (12) light flashes with eyes open, (13) shimmering images, and (14) dark shadows. RESULTS: The median correlation among having 14 symptoms at baseline was only 0.19. Mean uncorrected binocular visual acuity improved from a preoperative value of 0.47 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR; Snellen 20/59) to a postoperative value of 0.12 (20/26) and best-corrected binocular visual acuity improved from 0.23 logMAR (20/34) preoperative to 0.05 logMAR (20/22) postoperative. The most bothersome symptoms were reduced after surgery: preoperative/postoperative glare (84%/36%), blurry vision (68%/22%), starbursts (66%/28%), hazy vision (63%/18%), snowballs (55%/17%), and halos (52%/22%). All symptoms decreased significantly (P < 0.0001) from before to after surgery except for dark crescent-shaped shadows (4%/4%). The percentage of symptoms rated as quite a bit or extremely bothersome declined from before to after surgery except for dark crescent-shaped shadows (29%/32%): blurry vision (54%/15%), snowballs (52%/14%), glare (49%/15%), and halos (46%/14%). Having monofocal IOL implants was associated with significantly more reduction in halos, starbursts, glare, and rings and spider webs, but less improvement in self-reported general vision. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides support for the 37-item Assessment of IntraOcular Lens Implant Symptoms (AIOLIS) instrument for use to assess symptoms and general perceptions of vision in clinical studies and clinical care. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Foundational Considerations for Artificial Intelligence Using Ophthalmic Images.

IMPORTANCE: The development of artificial intelligence (AI) and other machine diagnostic systems, also known as software as a medical device, and its recent introduction into clinical practice requires a deeply rooted foundation in bioethics for consideration by regulatory agencies and other stakeholders around the globe. OBJECTIVES: To initiate a dialogue on the issues to consider when developing a bioethically sound foundation for AI in medicine, based on images of eye structures, for discussion with all stakeholders. EVIDENCE REVIEW: The scope of the issues and summaries of the discussions under consideration by the Foundational Principles of Ophthalmic Imaging and Algorithmic Interpretation Working Group, as first presented during the Collaborative Community on Ophthalmic Imaging inaugural meeting on September 7, 2020, and afterward in the working group. FINDINGS: Artificial intelligence has the potential to improve health care access and patient outcome fundamentally while decreasing disparities, lowering cost, and enhancing the care team. Nevertheless, substantial concerns exist. Bioethicists, AI algorithm experts, as well as the Food and Drug Administration and other regulatory agencies, industry, patient advocacy groups, clinicians and their professional societies, other provider groups, and payors (i.e., stakeholders) working together in collaborative communities to resolve the fundamental ethical issues of nonmaleficence, autonomy, and equity are essential to attain this potential. Resolution impacts all levels of the design, validation, and implementation of AI in medicine. Design, validation, and implementation of AI warrant meticulous attention. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The development of a bioethically sound foundation may be possible if it is based in the fundamental ethical principles of nonmaleficence, autonomy, and equity for considerations for the design, validation, and implementation for AI systems. Achieving such a foundation will be helpful for continuing successful introduction into medicine before consideration by regulatory agencies. Important improvements in accessibility and quality of health care, decrease in health disparities, and lower cost thereby can be achieved. These considerations should be discussed with all stakeholders and expanded on as a useful initiation of this dialogue.

From Data to Deployment: The Collaborative Community on Ophthalmic Imaging Roadmap for Artificial Intelligence in Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

OBJECTIVE: Health care systems worldwide are challenged to provide adequate care for the 200 million individuals with age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to make a significant, positive impact on the diagnosis and management of patients with AMD; however, the development of effective AI devices for clinical care faces numerous considerations and challenges, a fact evidenced by a current absence of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved AI devices for AMD. PURPOSE: To delineate the state of AI for AMD, including current data, standards, achievements, and challenges. METHODS: Members of the Collaborative Community on Ophthalmic Imaging Working Group for AI in AMD attended an inaugural meeting on September 7, 2020, to discuss the topic. Subsequently, they undertook a comprehensive review of the medical literature relevant to the topic. Members engaged in meetings and discussion through December 2021 to synthesize the information and arrive at a consensus. RESULTS: Existing infrastructure for robust AI development for AMD includes several large, labeled data sets of color fundus photography and OCT images; however, image data often do not contain the metadata necessary for the development of reliable, valid, and generalizable models. Data sharing for AMD model development is made difficult by restrictions on data privacy and security, although potential solutions are under investigation. Computing resources may be adequate for current applications, but knowledge of machine learning development may be scarce in many clinical ophthalmology settings. Despite these challenges, researchers have produced promising AI models for AMD for screening, diagnosis, prediction, and monitoring. Future goals include defining benchmarks to facilitate regulatory authorization and subsequent clinical setting generalization. CONCLUSIONS: Delivering an FDA-authorized, AI-based device for clinical care in AMD involves numerous considerations, including the identification of an appropriate clinical application; acquisition and development of a large, high-quality data set; development of the AI architecture; training and validation of the model; and functional interactions between the model output and clinical end user. The research efforts undertaken to date represent starting points for the medical devices that eventually will benefit providers, health care systems, and patients.

Artificial Intelligence for Retinopathy of Prematurity: Validation of a Vascular Severity Scale against International Expert Diagnosis.

PURPOSE: To validate a vascular severity score as an appropriate output for artificial intelligence (AI) Software as a Medical Device (SaMD) for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) through comparison with ordinal disease severity labels for stage and plus disease assigned by the International Classification of Retinopathy of Prematurity, Third Edition (ICROP3), committee. DESIGN: Validation study of an AI-based ROP vascular severity score. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 34 ROP experts from the ICROP3 committee. METHODS: Two separate datasets of 30 fundus photographs each for stage (0-5) and plus disease (plus, preplus, neither) were labeled by members of the ICROP3 committee using an open-source platform. Averaging these results produced a continuous label for plus (1-9) and stage (1-3) for each image. Experts were also asked to compare each image to each other in terms of relative severity for plus disease. Each image was also labeled with a vascular severity score from the Imaging and Informatics in ROP deep learning system, which was compared with each grader's diagnostic labels for correlation, as well as the ophthalmoscopic diagnosis of stage. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Weighted kappa and Pearson correlation coefficients (CCs) were calculated between each pair of grader classification labels for stage and plus disease. The Elo algorithm was also used to convert pairwise comparisons for each expert into an ordered set of images from least to most severe. RESULTS: The mean weighted kappa and CC for all interobserver pairs for plus disease image comparison were 0.67 and 0.88, respectively. The vascular severity score was found to be highly correlated with both the average plus disease classification (CC = 0.90, P < 0.001) and the ophthalmoscopic diagnosis of stage (P < 0.001 by analysis of variance) among all experts. CONCLUSIONS: The ROP vascular severity score correlates well with the International Classification of Retinopathy of Prematurity committee member's labels for plus disease and stage, which had significant intergrader variability. Generation of a consensus for a validated scoring system for ROP SaMD can facilitate global innovation and regulatory authorization of these technologies.

Acanthamoeba: An Overview of the Challenges to the Development of a Consensus Methodology of Disinfection Efficacy Testing for Contact Lens Care Products.

With the increasing incidence of more pathogens that can cause microbial keratitis (MK), it is necessary to periodically reassess disinfection multipurpose solutions testing requirements to ensure that relevant organisms to challenge them are being used. Current testing protocols have included common pathogens such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, Serratia marcescens, Candida albicans, and Fusarium solani but have omitted less common pathogens such as Acanthamoeba. Specifically, Acanthamoeba sp. has recently been identified as a prevalent cause of MK in certain countries. Developing an appropriate protocol for this unique organism presents a challenge, given its two distinct life stages, methods to grow the organism, encystment techniques, and many other parameters that can affect testing outcomes. Therefore, the appropriate combination of these parameters is crucial to developing a protocol that ensures consistent, accurate results. The FDA has recognized the importance of establishing a standardized testing protocol for this pathogen and embarked on research efforts to provide a recommended testing protocol for testing contact lens care products.

Assessment of Clinical Trials for Devices Intended to Control Myopia Progression in Children.

The increased prevalence of myopia in the United States and other regions of the world, and the sight-threatening problems associated with higher levels of myopia have led to great interest in research designed to reduce these rates. As most of the progression of myopia occurs in childhood, these investigations have been directed toward slowing the progression of myopia in children. Treatments described to potentially slow the progression of myopia have included pharmacological interventions, multifocal spectacles, and multifocal correction created by contact lenses. Although some contact lens clinical trials have demonstrated promising results in slowing the progression of myopia, many of these studies have significant limitations, including only short follow-up times, limited randomization, and incomplete masking. Such limitations have underscored the need to develop a more robust clinical study design, so that future studies can demonstrate whether contact lenses, as well as other medical devices, can be used in a safe and effective manner to control myopia progression. We review previous key studies and discuss study design and regulatory issues relevant to future clinical trials.

Optimized Protocol for Testing Multipurpose Contact Lens Solution Efficacy Against Acanthamoeba.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the interlaboratory and intralaboratory reproducibility of a proposed protocol for multipurpose contact lens solution (MPS) disinfection efficacy against Acanthamoeba. METHODS: Acanthamoeba castellanii and Acanthamoeba polyphaga and four MPS with different biocidal agents were used to evaluate the protocol in two different laboratories. In addition to the negative control, a positive control and neutralization control were used. One experiment was performed in triplicate, and all other experiments were performed in duplicate in each laboratory. Acanthamoeba trophozoites were grown axenically, and cysts were generated using the starvation method. Trophozoites and cysts at a concentration of 2.0 × 10 to 2.0 × 10 organisms per milliliter were exposed to the test MPS for 0, 4 or 6 (manufacturer's recommended soak time [MRST]), 8, and 24 hr. Survivors were determined by a limiting dilution method that used a most probable number evaluation. RESULTS: The positive and negative controls displayed consistent results and trends both within each laboratory and between each laboratory for trophozoites and cysts of both A. castellanii and A. polyphaga. The neutralization control consistently demonstrated the ability of the neutralizing agents to neutralize the MPS and the positive control and demonstrated no inhibition of Acanthamoeba by the negative control. Testing in triplicate and duplicate demonstrated the reproducibility of the protocol both within each laboratory and between the laboratories. Our results demonstrated that the MPS at the MRST and at 8 hr (likely overnight soak time) are generally more effective against trophozoites than they are against cysts. Only the MPS with hydrogen peroxide as the biocidal agent was able to provide a greater than three-log kill of cysts at the MRST and longer. Among the MPS we tested, trophozoites of A. castellanii and A. polyphaga showed similar responses. Some variability was observed when testing cysts of both species. In both laboratories, one nonhydrogen peroxide containing MPS had some effect (>1 log kill) on A. polyphaga cysts. This solution had no effect (<1 log kill) on A. castellanii cysts, A. castellanii trophozoites, and A. polyphaga trophozoites. CONCLUSIONS: The protocol that we have revised and evaluated is a well-controlled and reproducible procedure that can effectively evaluate the efficacy of MPS against Acanthamoeba trophozoites. Some variability was observed when testing the cyst stage.

Food and Drug Administration, American Academy of Ophthalmology, American Academy of Optometry, American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, American Optometric Association, American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, and Contact Lens Association of Ophthalmologists Co-Sponsored Workshop: Controlling the Progression of Myopia: Contact Lenses and Future Medical Devices.

The prevalence of myopia is high and increasing. Approximately 5 billion people around the world are expected to be myopic by the year 2050. Methods to slow the progression of myopia and therefore potentially decrease the associated sight-threatening complications have been the subject of a number of investigations. A workshop, sponsored by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Center for Devices and Radiological Health, American Academy of Ophthalmology, American Academy of Optometry, American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, American Optometric Association, American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, and Contact Lens Association of Ophthalmologists, Inc, convened myopia experts from around the world to discuss principles to consider in the design of clinical trials investigating the effectiveness and safety of myopia control devices. Experts discussed parameters such as study endpoints, duration, enrollment criteria, patient-reported outcomes, recruitment, and retention. The discussions among the experts, FDA, and audience members should help to facilitate the development and evaluation of reasonably safe and effective myopia control devices.

Food and Drug Administration Efforts to Mitigate Contact Lens Discomfort.

The premarket review of contact lenses and accessories by the FDA involves the assessment of nonclinical and clinical information in support of clearance or approval of marketing applications. The review process for these medical devices, including attributes, which may contribute to comfort for lens wearers, is summarized, as are mechanisms by which FDA continues to assess and improve recommendations through the review process and through collaboration with external entities.

A Health-Related Quality of Life Measure for Patients Who Undergo Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery.

PURPOSE: To develop a patient-reported outcome measure to assess the impact of glaucoma and treatment, including minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS). DESIGN: Observational study before and after concomitant cataract and Food and Drug Administration-approved implantable MIGS device surgery. SETTING: Survey administration was on a computer, iPad, or similar device. PATIENT POPULATION: 184 adults completed the baseline survey, 124 a survey 3 months after surgery, and 106 the 1-month test-retest reliability survey. The age range was 37 to 89 (average age = 72). Most were female (57%), non-Hispanic White (81%), and had a college degree (56%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Glaucoma Outcomes Survey (GOS) assesses functional limitations (27 items), vision-related symptoms (7 items), psychosocial issues (7 items), and satisfaction with microinvasive glaucoma surgery (1 item). These multiple-item scales were scored on a 0 to 100 range, with a higher score indicating worse health. RESULTS: Internal consistency reliability estimates ranged from 0.75 to 0.93, and 1-month test-retest intraclass correlations ranged from 0.83 to 0.92 for the GOS scales. Product-moment correlations among the scales ranged from 0.56 to 0.60. Improvement in visual acuity in the study eye from baseline to the 3-month follow-up was significantly related to improvements in GOS functional limitations (r = 0.18, P = .0485), vision-related symptoms (r = 0.19, P = .0386), and psychosocial concerns (r = 0.18, P = .0503). Responders to treatment ranged from 17% for vision-related symptoms to 48% for functional limitations. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports using the GOS for ophthalmic procedures such as MIGS. Further evaluation of the GOS in different patient subgroups and clinical settings is needed.

Web-based versus paper administration of common ophthalmic questionnaires: comparison of subscale scores.

OBJECTIVE: To compare participants' responses to Web-based and paper-and-pencil versions of an ophthalmic, patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaire. DESIGN: Questionnaire development. PARTICIPANTS: Matched subjects with ocular surface disease (OSD) (n = 68) and without OSD (controls, n = 50). METHODS: Subjects completed a standard, paper-and-pencil and a Web-based version of the same questionnaire in randomized order. The administered questionnaire included several ophthalmic PRO subscales: the National Eye Institute's (NEI's) Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument's Clarity of Vision, Near Vision, Far Vision, Glare, Symptoms, Worry, and Satisfaction with Correction subscales; the Ocular Surface Disease Index's (OSDI's) Symptoms subscale; and the NEI's Visual Function Questionnaire's Driving subscale. Possible scores for each subscale ranged from 0 (no difficulty) to 100 (most difficulty). Agreement of subscale scores between modes of administration was assessed using the Bland-Altman approach and multivariable logistic regression. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Subscale scores and an unweighted average total score for each mode of administration. RESULTS: Mean differences in scores between modes of administration ranged from -2.1 to +2.3 units. Although no differences were found to be statistically significant, the Worry and Satisfaction with Correction subscales approached statistical significance (P = 0.07 and 0.08, respectively). Although most subscale mean differences in score did not differ significantly by gender, age (≥40 vs. <40 years), disease status (OSD vs. control), order of administration, or time between completion of the questionnaires, women had slightly greater score differences than men for the Driving (P = 0.04) and Clarity of Vision (P = 0.03) subscales; those with OSD had greater score differences for Clarity of Vision than did controls (P = 0.0006); and those aged ≥40 years had slightly greater differences in OSDI Symptoms subscale than those aged <40 years (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this Food and Drug Administration and NEI collaboration is the first study to evaluate the equivalence of Web-based and paper versions of ophthalmic PRO questionnaires. We found no evidence of clinically significant differences between scores obtained by the 2 modes for any of the examined subscales. A Web-based instrument should yield scores equivalent to those obtained by standard methods, providing a useful tool that may facilitate ophthalmic innovation. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

FDA's role in expediting innovation of bioelectronic implants for vision restoration.

Bioelectronic implants for vision restoration are medical devices regulated in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This paper provides an overview of regulatory pathways and related FDA programs for bioelectronic implants for vision restoration, and identifies some of the gaps in the regulatory science of these devices. The FDA recognizes that additional discussion regarding development in this space is needed to further develop bioelectronic implants and ensure that safe and effective technologies are made available to patients with profound vision loss. FDA regularly participates in the Eye and the Chip World Research Congress meetings and continues to engage with important external stakeholders, including through public workshops such as the recent co-sponsored Expediting Innovation of Bioelectronic Implants for Vision Restoration. By participating in forums for discussion of these devices with all stakeholders, especially patients, FDA seeks to encourage advancement of these devices.

Considerations for addressing bias in artificial intelligence for health equity.

Health equity is a primary goal of healthcare stakeholders: patients and their advocacy groups, clinicians, other providers and their professional societies, bioethicists, payors and value based care organizations, regulatory agencies, legislators, and creators of artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML)-enabled medical devices. Lack of equitable access to diagnosis and treatment may be improved through new digital health technologies, especially AI/ML, but these may also exacerbate disparities, depending on how bias is addressed. We propose an expanded Total Product Lifecycle (TPLC) framework for healthcare AI/ML, describing the sources and impacts of undesirable bias in AI/ML systems in each phase, how these can be analyzed using appropriate metrics, and how they can be potentially mitigated. The goal of these "Considerations" is to educate stakeholders on how potential AI/ML bias may impact healthcare outcomes and how to identify and mitigate inequities; to initiate a discussion between stakeholders on these issues, in order to ensure health equity along the expanded AI/ML TPLC framework, and ultimately, better health outcomes for all.

The Definition of Glaucomatous Optic Neuropathy in Artificial Intelligence Research and Clinical Applications.

OBJECTIVE: Although artificial intelligence (AI) models may offer innovative and powerful ways to use the wealth of data generated by diagnostic tools, there are important challenges related to their development and validation. Most notable is the lack of a perfect reference standard for glaucomatous optic neuropathy (GON). Because AI models are trained to predict presence of glaucoma or its progression, they generally rely on a reference standard that is used to train the model and assess its validity. If an improper reference standard is used, the model may be trained to detect or predict something that has little or no clinical value. This article summarizes the issues and discussions related to the definition of GON in AI applications as presented by the Glaucoma Workgroup from the Collaborative Community for Ophthalmic Imaging (CCOI) US Food and Drug Administration Virtual Workshop, on September 3 and 4, 2020, and on January 28, 2022. DESIGN: Review and conference proceedings. SUBJECTS: No human or animal subjects or data therefrom were used in the production of this article. METHODS: A summary of the Workshop was produced with input and approval from all participants. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Consensus position of the CCOI Workgroup on the challenges in defining GON and possible solutions. RESULTS: The Workshop reviewed existing challenges that arise from the use of subjective definitions of GON and highlighted the need for a more objective approach to characterize GON that could facilitate replication and comparability of AI studies and allow for better clinical validation of proposed AI tools. Different tests and combination of parameters for defining a reference standard for GON have been proposed. Different reference standards may need to be considered depending on the scenario in which the AI models are going to be applied, such as community-based or opportunistic screening versus detection or monitoring of glaucoma in tertiary care. CONCLUSIONS: The development and validation of new AI-based diagnostic tests should be based on rigorous methodology with clear determination of how the reference standards for glaucomatous damage are constructed and the settings where the tests are going to be applied. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Rabbit ocular reactivity to bacterial endotoxin contained in aqueous solution and ophthalmic viscosurgical devices.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the ocular reactivity of the rabbit to bacterial endotoxin contained in an aqueous medium and in a cohesive and a dispersive ophthalmic viscosurgical device (OVD). DESIGN: Experimental, randomized animal study. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-five New Zealand white rabbits. METHODS: This study was performed using 75 rabbits to evaluate the ocular reactivity to bacterial endotoxin contained in Dulbecco's phosphate-buffered saline (DPBS), a cohesive OVD, and a dispersive OVD. For each test material, 25 rabbits were randomized into 5 groups and were exposed to the test material containing 0.75 endotoxin units (EU), 0.25 EU, 0.08 EU, and 0.02 EU of endotoxin or the vehicle control. The rabbits in each group received bilateral intracameral injection of 0.05 ml of the same test material. All eyes were examined by slit-lamp biomicroscopy at baseline, 3, 6, 9, 24, 48, and 72 hours after injection. At 24 and 72 hours, slit-lamp biomicroscopy (and additionally indirect ophthalmoscopy) was performed through dilated pupils. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Corneal clouding, anterior chamber (AC) flare, cells and fibrin, vitreous haze and cells, cells and fibrin on lens surface, lens opacities, and onset time. RESULTS: The inflammation seen after exposure to the 3 endotoxin-spiked materials followed the same general time course. Anterior chamber cells, flare, iris hyperemia, and conjunctival congestion were seen as early as 3 hours. They started to diminish after 6 hours (DPBS eyes) and 9 hours (OVDs) and were not detectable at 48 and 72 hours, respectively. The AC inflammation was more severe in the OVD eyes than in the DPBS eyes. Anterior chamber fibrin was seen in the OVD eyes only, which persisted through 72 hours in many eyes. A trend toward a dose-response relationship was seen for AC cells and flare and the presence of cells and fibrin on the lens surface in all 3 treatment groups in the first 24 hours. CONCLUSIONS: Inflammation was seen after intracameral injection of as little as 0.02 and 0.08 EU in OVD and DPBS eyes, respectively. Observed responses to intracamerally injected endotoxin in OVDs were more severe and of longer duration than those in aqueous medium.

Detecting endotoxin contamination of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices: intracameral versus intravitreal assays in rabbits.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the sensitivities of intracameral and intravitreal assays in the rabbit model to determine the relative adequacy of these methods in detecting bacterial endotoxin contamination of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs). DESIGN: Experimental, randomized animal study. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty New Zealand white rabbits. METHODS: Rabbits were randomized into 4 groups to receive a cohesive or a dispersive OVD via intracameral or intravitreal injection. All 40 treated eyes (10 eyes of 5 animals in each group) received bilateral injection of OVD spiked with bacterial endotoxin at 7.0 endotoxin units/ml. All eyes were evaluated by slit-lamp biomicroscopy for inflammatory response at 3, 6, 9, 24, 48, and 72 hours after exposure. Eyes that received intravitreal injection were also dilated at 24, 48, and 72 hours and were re-examined by slit-lamp biomicroscopy and by indirect ophthalmoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Conjunctival inflammation, anterior chamber (AC) flare, cells and fibrin, vitreous haze and cells, iridal hyperemia, corneal clouding, lens opacities, and onset times. RESULTS: Intracamerally injected eyes frequently showed conjunctival congestion, AC cells and flare, iridal hyperemia, and fibrin within 6 hours. Up to 80% showed AC cells and flare at 9 hours, and up to 70% showed fibrin at 24 hours. These signs diminished within 48 hours. Fibrin and cells also were seen on the lens surface of most of the eyes. Intravitreally injected eyes showed no signs of inflammation within 24 hours, other than some conjunctival inflammation. After the 24-hour time point, in addition to some conjunctival inflammation, some other signs of inflammation were observed infrequently in the intravitreally injected eyes, including minor vitreous cell reaction in 2 eyes. Although there was 1 dispersive OVD-treated eye with cells and fibrin on the lens capsule at 48 hours, no aqueous cells or flare were seen in the AC of any intravitreally injected eyes at any time during the course of the study. CONCLUSIONS: The rabbit intravitreal assay, when limited to 72 hours, does not seem to have adequate sensitivity to detect endotoxin reliably in OVDs.