Abstract: Artificial tears & dessication
This is an interesting study in concept, however, all of the drops studied (drops available in Europe, not the US) are based on the polymers povidone and/or polyvinyl alcohol, which are not all that common in the US, where carboxymethylcellulose & the like predominate.
For reference, the actives in the named brands in this study are:
LACRIMAL = pva, povidone
ARUFIL = povidone
LACOPHTHAL SINE = povidone
SICCAPROTECT = dexpanthenol, pva
TEARS AGAIN = pva
VIDISEPT = povidone
WET COMOD = povidone
Background: A large number of artificial tears is widely used to treat dry eye symptoms. To test the efficacy of these drugs independent of individual parameters in vitro models are required. As described previously, we employed a reproducible in vitro cell culture system to evaluate the desiccation protection capability of some artificial tears. In the present paper data is presented of another set of pharmaceutical agents.
Material/Methods: Conjunctival epithelial cell line Chang 1-5c-4 (series 1) and the corneal cell line 2.040 pRSV-T (series 2) were cultured under standard conditions. Confluent cells were wetted for 20 min with artificial tears (Arufil® Uno, Arufil®, Lacrimal®, Lacophthal® sine, Siccaprotect®, Tears Again®, Vidisept® EDO, Vistil®, Wet Comod®) or PBS as a control. After exposure to a constant air flow for 0, 15, 30 and 45 minutes respectively, cells were incubated with the vital dye alamarBlue. Subsequently, absorption of the oxidised form of the dye was assessed using an ELISA-Reader.
Results: Cell best survival rates in series 1 after 15 min were found for Lacrimal® (0.89), Wet Comod® (0.84) compared to PBS (0.66) and in series 2 for Vidisept® EDO (0.57) and Lacrimal® (0.56) compared to PBS (0.01). After 45 min highest survival was seen in series 1 for Lacrimal® (0.46) and Lacophthal® sine (0.36) compared to PBS (0.33) and in series 2 for Lacrimal® (-0.06) and Arufil (-0.16) compared to PBS (-0.23).
Conclusions: Both cell lines tested showed different susceptibility towards desiccation and the artificial tears showed differences in preventing cells from desiccation.
Med Sci Monit. 2012 Apr 23;18(5):BR188-192.
Tost F, Keiss R, Großjohann R, Jürgens C, Giebel J.
Department of Ophthalmology, University Medicine, Greifswald, Germany.