Collagen analogs with phosphorylcholine are inflammation-suppressing scaffolds for corneal regeneration from alkali burns in mini-pigs.

The long-term survival of biomaterial implants is often hampered by surgery-induced inflammation that can lead to graft failure. Considering that most corneas receiving grafts are either pathological or inflamed before implantation, the risk of rejection is heightened. Here, we show that bioengineered, fully synthetic, and robust corneal implants can be manufactured from a collagen analog (collagen-like peptide-polyethylene glycol hybrid, CLP-PEG) and inflammation-suppressing polymeric 2-methacryloyloxyethyl phosphorylcholine (MPC) when stabilized with the triazine-based crosslinker 4-(4,6-Dimethoxy-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)-4-methylmorpholinium chloride. The resulting CLP-PEG-MPC implants led to reduced corneal swelling, haze, and neovascularization in comparison to CLP-PEG only implants when grafted into a mini-pig cornea alkali burn model of inflammation over 12 months. Implants incorporating MPC allowed for faster nerve regeneration and recovery of corneal sensation. CLP-PEG-MPC implants appear to be at a more advanced stage of regeneration than the CLP-PEG only implants, as evidenced by the presence of higher amounts of cornea-specific type V collagen, and a corresponding decrease in the presence of extracellular vesicles and exosomes in the corneal stroma, in keeping with the amounts present in healthy, unoperated corneas.

Visual field plasticity in hearing users of sign language.

Studies have observed that deaf signers have a larger Visual Field (VF) than hearing non-signers with a particular large extension in the lower part of the VF. This increment could stem from early deafness or from the extensive use of sign language, since the lower VF is critical to perceive and understand linguistics gestures in sign language communication. The aim of the present study was to explore the potential impact of sign language experience without deafness on the VF sensitivity within its lower part. Using standard Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer, we compared luminance sensitivity in the fovea and between 3 and 27 degrees of visual eccentricity for the upper and lower VF, between hearing users of French Sign Language and age-matched hearing non-signers. The sensitivity in the fovea and in the upper VF were similar in both groups. Hearing signers had, however, higher luminance sensitivity than non-signers in the lower VF but only between 3 and 15°, the visual location for sign language perception. Sign language experience, no associated with deafness, may then be a modulating factor of VF sensitivity but restricted to the very specific location where signs are perceived.