Cargando…

Common Ophthalmic Preservatives in Soft Contact Lens Care Products: Benefits, Complications, and a Comparison to Non-Preserved Solutions

PURPOSE: Preservatives are essential for preventing contact lens (CL)-related microbial keratitis (MK). The purpose of this review is to summarize the current knowledge related to the use of common ophthalmic preservatives in CL care products with respect to both safety and efficacy. METHODS: Manusc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bradley, Chelsea S, Sicks, Lindsay A, Pucker, Andrew D
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8434857/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34522149
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTO.S235679
_version_ 1783751692065439744
author Bradley, Chelsea S
Sicks, Lindsay A
Pucker, Andrew D
author_facet Bradley, Chelsea S
Sicks, Lindsay A
Pucker, Andrew D
author_sort Bradley, Chelsea S
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Preservatives are essential for preventing contact lens (CL)-related microbial keratitis (MK). The purpose of this review is to summarize the current knowledge related to the use of common ophthalmic preservatives in CL care products with respect to both safety and efficacy. METHODS: Manuscripts written in English were obtained by searching PubMed.gov with the term contact lens plus antimicrobial, benzalkonium chloride, biguanide, Aldox, polyquaternium, preservative, thimerosal, EDTA (ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid), chlorhexidine, or blister pack. RESULTS: This review found that first-generation preservatives are no longer used in CL multipurpose solutions (MPS) due to their high levels of ocular toxicity. Modern, high-molecular-weight preservatives, including polyquaternium-1 (PQ-1) and biguanides (PHMB), are generally effective against bacteria, minimally effective against fungi, and not effective against Acanthamoeba. PQ-1 and PHMB are likely safe when used with CLs, but they may cause ocular adverse events, with roughly equal risk between the two preservatives. Some CL MPS contain both PQ-1 and PHMB, but no increased risk of adverse events has been reported when combining the two. Hydrogen-peroxide (H(2)O(2)) solutions are effective against all common ocular microbes, including Acanthamoeba, and they have been proven safe with proper compliance. Povidone-iodine (P-I) solutions are not currently commercially available in North America, but they have been shown in other countries to be safe and effective. CONCLUSION: Patients should be monitored when using PQ-1 or PHMB-containing solutions since they have been associated with ocular adverse events. If events are detected, patients should be switched to an alternative solution. H(2)O(2) or P-I solutions are preferred for any patient who may expose their CLs to water because they are the only solution categories effective against Acanthamoeba.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8434857
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84348572021-09-13 Common Ophthalmic Preservatives in Soft Contact Lens Care Products: Benefits, Complications, and a Comparison to Non-Preserved Solutions Bradley, Chelsea S Sicks, Lindsay A Pucker, Andrew D Clin Optom (Auckl) Review PURPOSE: Preservatives are essential for preventing contact lens (CL)-related microbial keratitis (MK). The purpose of this review is to summarize the current knowledge related to the use of common ophthalmic preservatives in CL care products with respect to both safety and efficacy. METHODS: Manuscripts written in English were obtained by searching PubMed.gov with the term contact lens plus antimicrobial, benzalkonium chloride, biguanide, Aldox, polyquaternium, preservative, thimerosal, EDTA (ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid), chlorhexidine, or blister pack. RESULTS: This review found that first-generation preservatives are no longer used in CL multipurpose solutions (MPS) due to their high levels of ocular toxicity. Modern, high-molecular-weight preservatives, including polyquaternium-1 (PQ-1) and biguanides (PHMB), are generally effective against bacteria, minimally effective against fungi, and not effective against Acanthamoeba. PQ-1 and PHMB are likely safe when used with CLs, but they may cause ocular adverse events, with roughly equal risk between the two preservatives. Some CL MPS contain both PQ-1 and PHMB, but no increased risk of adverse events has been reported when combining the two. Hydrogen-peroxide (H(2)O(2)) solutions are effective against all common ocular microbes, including Acanthamoeba, and they have been proven safe with proper compliance. Povidone-iodine (P-I) solutions are not currently commercially available in North America, but they have been shown in other countries to be safe and effective. CONCLUSION: Patients should be monitored when using PQ-1 or PHMB-containing solutions since they have been associated with ocular adverse events. If events are detected, patients should be switched to an alternative solution. H(2)O(2) or P-I solutions are preferred for any patient who may expose their CLs to water because they are the only solution categories effective against Acanthamoeba. Dove 2021-09-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8434857/ /pubmed/34522149 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTO.S235679 Text en © 2021 Bradley et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Review
Bradley, Chelsea S
Sicks, Lindsay A
Pucker, Andrew D
Common Ophthalmic Preservatives in Soft Contact Lens Care Products: Benefits, Complications, and a Comparison to Non-Preserved Solutions
title Common Ophthalmic Preservatives in Soft Contact Lens Care Products: Benefits, Complications, and a Comparison to Non-Preserved Solutions
title_full Common Ophthalmic Preservatives in Soft Contact Lens Care Products: Benefits, Complications, and a Comparison to Non-Preserved Solutions
title_fullStr Common Ophthalmic Preservatives in Soft Contact Lens Care Products: Benefits, Complications, and a Comparison to Non-Preserved Solutions
title_full_unstemmed Common Ophthalmic Preservatives in Soft Contact Lens Care Products: Benefits, Complications, and a Comparison to Non-Preserved Solutions
title_short Common Ophthalmic Preservatives in Soft Contact Lens Care Products: Benefits, Complications, and a Comparison to Non-Preserved Solutions
title_sort common ophthalmic preservatives in soft contact lens care products: benefits, complications, and a comparison to non-preserved solutions
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8434857/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34522149
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTO.S235679
work_keys_str_mv AT bradleychelseas commonophthalmicpreservativesinsoftcontactlenscareproductsbenefitscomplicationsandacomparisontononpreservedsolutions
AT sickslindsaya commonophthalmicpreservativesinsoftcontactlenscareproductsbenefitscomplicationsandacomparisontononpreservedsolutions
AT puckerandrewd commonophthalmicpreservativesinsoftcontactlenscareproductsbenefitscomplicationsandacomparisontononpreservedsolutions