Ocular Surface Changes in Prostaglandin Analogue-Treated Patients

Shen, Wencui; Huang, Bingqing; Yang, Jin

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9798272

Journal of Ophthalmology

On this page

Abstract Introduction Conclusion Conflicts of Interest Acknowledgments References Copyright Related Articles

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2019 | Article ID 9798272 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9798272

Ocular Surface Changes in Prostaglandin Analogue-Treated Patients

Wencui Shen,¹Bingqing Huang,²and Jin Yang¹

Academic Editor: Stefano Baiocchi

Received04 Aug 2019

Accepted25 Nov 2019

Published10 Dec 2019

Abstract

Glaucoma is the second leading cause of blindness globally. Reducing intraocular pressure (IOP) has been acknowledged to be the main therapy for glaucoma. Prostaglandin analogues (PGAs) have become the first-line therapy for patients with glaucoma due to their powerful efficacy for lowering (IOP). However, usage of PGAs can also cause several notable side effects, including the changes in ocular surface. The relationship between PGAs and ocular surface changes is complicated and still remains unclear. In the present review, we summarize the recent studies of the effects of PGAs on ocular changes as well as the possible mechanisms that might provide new considerations during clinical medication.

1. Introduction

Glaucoma is the second leading cause of blindness worldwide. It has been estimated that the number of patients with glaucoma will reach up to 79.6 million in 2020 [1]. Currently, it has been well recognized that intraocular pressure (IOP) is the key risk factor and the unique therapeutic target for glaucoma. The cause of IOP rise is due to the impairment of the outflow system [2]. Topical medication is mostly used for the initial treatment of glaucoma. The prostaglandin analogues (PGAs) have become widely used as the first-line strategy to reduce elevated IOP in glaucoma patients. With extensive clinical application of PGAs, it has been found that PGAs could influence ocular surface [3]. Except for some side effects (e.g., conjunctiva hyperemia, eyelash changes, and cystoid macular oedema), changes in corneal biomechanical properties, reduction of central corneal thickness (CCT), and ocular surface diseases (OSDs) related with preservatives of PGAs have also greatly drawn our attentions.

Among the side effects, some of the ocular surface changes have close correlation with IOP measurement and the progression of glaucoma, which highlights the clinical significance of themselves. The relationship between IOP and CCT has long been realized, and thinner CCT leads to the development of open-angle glaucoma (POAG) [4]. IOP and CCT are related to corneal biomechanical properties [5]. In addition, preservative, a relatively necessary element of PGAs, also makes a contribution to the changes in ocular surface, inducing complex inflammatory mechanisms and causing both allergy and toxicity [6].

In this review, we focused on the effect on the cornea and conjunctiva of PGA-treated individuals, with the following aspects summarized: corneal biomechanical properties, CCT, conjunctiva, wound healing, and dry eye. Interactions exist among these topics, encouraging further thinking and studies.

2. Corneal Biomechanical Properties

Recently, many studies have suggested that corneal biomechanical properties may prove to be important evidence of glaucoma progression, which could aggravate deformation of the optic nerve surface [7].

2.1. Corneal Hysteresis (CH)

CH is the resistance to corneal deformation, which is defined as the difference between the air-jet pressure at inward and outward applanation [8–10]. It has been confirmed that a low CH has a close relationship with advanced glaucoma damage and glaucoma progression [8]. More and more studies have demonstrated that topical PGAs could lead to alternation in CH of patients with glaucoma. A prospective case-control study of 108 eyes of POAG patients showed that, under PGA treatment, IOP values decreased and CH significantly increased, in which the parameters of each group were measured with an ocular response analyzer (ORA) before treatment and at 6-month intervals [11]. Indeed, earlier investigations have indicated that eyes with a higher IOP have a lower CH, and treatment of decreasing IOP may induce an opposite change in CH [12, 13]. With more attention to baseline IOP and CH, Agarwal and his colleagues indicated that although CH is lower in individuals with higher IOP, a lower CH could be an indicator of a powerful reduction of IOP under PGA treatment [14]. However, opposite points were found in patients under chronic PGA treatment during a prospective case-control study, which clarified that the cessation of chronic PGAs was associated with significant increase in CH, and that reinitiation of treatment could reverse the effect [15]. In addition, a 3-month animal research has recently been carried out with the result of no influence on CH of travoprost treatment. Therefore, the duration and cessation of PGA medication has also become an important factor in CH changes, and more rigorous studies are needed in this subject.

2.2. Corneal Resistance Factor (CFR)

CFR, another biomechanical property, reflects the overall resistance of the cornea to deformation, which may influence the measurement and the proper adjustment of IOP [12, 16]. Several studies have focused on the changes of CFR along with CH. Panagiotis Tsikripis and his colleagues made it clear that CFR did not show significant change in the PGA-treated group [11]. It is believed that CFR is correlated with CCT, regarding as an indicator in predicting glaucoma damage [17, 18]. However, PGAs were certificated to induce reversible reduction in CFR in those patients who accepted PGA monotherapy for at least 1 year [15]. The previous evidence improves our warning when assessing accuracy IOP of POAG patients under chronic PGA therapy, and we are in urgent need of more studies in animals and humans to deeply clear our points.

3. Central Corneal Thickness

Many studies have focused on the importance of central corneal thickness (CCT), a potential risk factor in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. CCT has been shown as the strongest predictive factor for visual field loss and optic nerve head changes of glaucoma [17]. However, corneal thickness affects Goldmann applanation tonometry; therefore, CCT and IOP both cannot be regarded as completely independent risk factors.

Several clinical studies reported that PGA therapy could decrease CCT [18–21]. Torsten Schlote and colleagues performed a consecutive, interventional case series including 74 patients/136 eyes with glaucoma, in which they found one-year treatment with travoprost led to a significant reduction of CCT [18]. Similar results were shown in three groups that accepted monotherapy with PGAs (latanoprost 0.005%, travoprost 0.004%, or bimatoprost 0.03%) for 6 months, and no significant difference was found among these three groups. Furthermore, Birt and colleagues indicated that the relationship between CCT and IOP lowering was negative at 12 weeks after initiating therapy, but a significant association was detected over a 24-week duration of medication [22]. Therefore, we could generally conclude that PGAs can increase CCT, but we could not make sure the precise follow-up period when the obvious effect of PGAs exhibited. Even so, CCT evaluation along with the IOP measurements at all visits can provide beneficial information for setting target IOP levels and defining “nonresponse” [23, 24].

Moreover, as we know, CH, CFR, and CCT are closely positively correlated [25]. CH, as above described, is a direct measurement of cornea biomechanics, whereas CCT, one of them, affects CH [11]. Roman Meda and colleagues confirmed that IOP underestimation was necessary in lower CH eyes [15]. CFR is also a useful predictor in glaucoma progression, which may be correlated with CCT [17, 18]. Further studies with a larger group and longer follow-up would be meaningful to confirm these opinions.

4. Conjunctival Modification

Conjunctival hyperemia, the most common side effect of PGAs, is regarded as the result from nitric oxide-mediated vasodilatation in the conjunctiva [26–28]. It is believed that the inflammation process is not involved in the reversible hyperemia. However, more and more patients preferred to pause the medication of PGAs [29, 30]. At present, several studies have focused on the toxicity of BAK (benzalkonium chloride), a mostly used preservative in eye drops. Although different kinds of PGAs contain different concentrations of BAK, it is recognized that conjunctival hyperemia is not a direct consequence of BAK toxicity. Latanoprost, with the highest concentration of BAK, causes a lower incidence of hyperemia [31].

Meanwhile, more and more in vitro and in vivo studies aim to clear the influence of PGAs on the conjunctiva. Eun Joo et al. revealed that BAK-induced cytotoxicity is dose-dependent in primary human conjunctival fibroblast cells [32]. Hong Liang and his colleagues indicated that ocular surface immunity played a necessary role in conjunctiva hyperemia, in which conjunctiva-associated lymphoid tissue (CALT) was involved [33–35]. They observed CALT reaction after BAK-containing eye drops treated by in vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM), characterized by inflammatory cell infiltration in the dome and intrafollicular layers and by cell circulation inside the lymph vessels [36]. A recent study about CALT in chronic OSD revealed that similar changes as increased lymphoid cells within the diffuse layer, follicles, and interfollicular spaces appeared in different stimulating environment [37]. Another interesting phenomenon observed by laser scanning confocal microscopy (LSCM) is that the mean area of epithelial microcysts increased in PGA-treated glaucomatous patients without medication history, which may predict the rising outflow of the transconjunctival aqueous humor [38]. Moreover, tear proteomics analysis showed increased levels of MMP-1, MMP-3, and MMP-9 and decreased levels of TIMP-1 and TIMP-2 in the PG-treated group [39]. Coincidently, MMP-1 and MMP-3 were upregulated in conjunctival biopsies of latanoprost-treated eyes, which may be related with reduced extracellular matrix deposition in the conjunctiva stroma [40]. It is generally recognized that the increased level of MMPs was involved in the process of ECM synthesis [41–44], which might have a better effect on the outcome of glaucoma filtering surgery [45].

5. Wound Healing

Above all else, clinically, a delay in corneal wound healing caused by PGAs seems to be another notable problem [46]. As we know, damage to the cornea can result in scarring, causes visual defects, and even leads to a complete loss of vision. Although components of PGAs, not only preservatives but also pH values, osmolarity, and so on, have latent toxicity [47], insufficient studies have been performed in this field, most of which still remain on the cellular level and animal experiment. Model of corneal erosion in rabbit was established by Pinheiro et al. [48], following which they measured the corneal healing process, and the corneal toxicity caused by the four PGAs was observed and evaluated. They concluded that monoprost could delay corneal healing, and BAC might be the main factor of corneal toxicity of Xalatan. Another similar research was done in rat debrided corneal epithelium, from which the investigators discovered that travoprost with sofZia seemed less toxic to the corneal epithelium [49]. Therefore, BAC could slow the corneal healing progress, due to its stimulatory effect on epithelial cell death [49–51] and its inducing effect in inflammation and apoptosis [52].

However, cationic oil-in-water emulsions (CE), a carrier of lipophilic drugs [53], has been found to improve the signs and symptoms of dry eye disease, which made researchers focus on the effectiveness and safety of preservative-free latanoprost 0.005% cationic oil-in-water emulsion (latanoprost-CE) [54]. Both in vitro and in vivo models showed the beneficial effect of CEs in corneal healing, whereas the adverse effect of BAC [55]. Thus, latanoprost-CE may have a longer-term prospect than BAC-based PGAs. More effective new preparations are needed, and clinical studies are also in need to ensure the advantages and safety of them.

6. Dry Eye Disease

Dry eye disease, one of the most common eye diseases [56], was redefined by the Asia Dry Eye Society as follows: “dry eye is a multifactorial disease characterized by unstable tear film causing a variety of symptoms and/of visual impairment, potentially accompanied by ocular surface damage.” As discordance between symptoms and signs of dry eye has been recognized [57], studies focused on the neurological or psychiatric factors in the development of dry eye have raised our concern [58, 59]. In addition, some researchers have proposed the concept of ocular surface microenvironment in both diagnosis and treatment of dry eye [60, 61].

More and more studies have demonstrated that a large proportion of patients who accepted the topical medication of PGAs suffer from ocular surface disease (OSD) [62–64]. And half of them complained that they suffered the discomfort of dry eye, which could be attributable to the active components as well as to the preservatives with the mechanisms of allergy, toxicity, and inflammation [65, 66]. However, some researchers have compared dry eye between glaucoma patients receiving PGA monotherapy and nonglaucoma subjects, and their results showed no significant difference between the two groups, suggesting that adverse ocular effects induced by PGA might be minimal [67]. And in a cross-sectional study, Teresa Rolle et al. indicated that tafluprost had no effect on tear stability comparing with preservative-free timolol, and the active component itself of both the groups may lead to ocular surface impairment [63]. Another prospective study showed that beta blockers induced more serious impact on the ocular surface mainly due to the active substances [68]. So, it seems that PGAs have better tolerance than beta blockers. Indeed, a similar conclusion was given in pediatric patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension [69].

On the contrary, meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) is generally an important cause of dry eye [70]. And several new techniques to evaluate the morphology and function of meibomian glands have been developed [71]. Long-term topical medication of PGAs can cause obstructive type of MGD [72]. Interestingly, Luca et al. have observed the morphological changes in meibomian glands induced by antiglaucoma medication through LSCM. They showed more significant modifications in the preserved PGA group than the preservative-free PGA group [73]. More studies should be carried out between PGAs and meibomian gland.

In addition, LSCM as the most reliable method for analyzing goblet cell (GC) in vivo can indentify GC morphology in glaucoma-related OSD [74]. GC loss may influence the ocular surface immune tolerance that is observed in dry eye [75]. A recent study showed the detrimental effect on GCs caused by antiglaucoma medications, including PGAs [76]. Moreover, preoperative dendritic cell (DC) density and goblet cell density are evaluation parameters correlated to the filtration surgery outcome in glaucomatous patients [77]. So, it is necessary to consider the GC and DC conditions of patients during glaucomatous medication and surgery.

Besides the effective components, the preservatives of PGAs can also cause dry eye. Among them, most of the studies have focused on the relationship between PGAs with different concentrations of BAK and dry eye. BAK, which is usually used at a concentration of 0.01% (range, 0.005–0.02%) in topical multidose solutions, has effective antimicrobial activity and high affinity for membrane proteins [78]. It is proved that BAK could hasten the drying of the tear film and aggravate preexisting dry eye [79, 80]. An open-label multicentre study of 158 patients has shown that preservative-free tafluprost was better tolerated than preserved latanoprost, in which tear break-up time (TBUT), Schirmer’s test, and fluorescein staining were used to evaluate the severity of ocular surface discomfort [81]. Another similar study performed by Giménez-Gómez et al. indicated that switching from preservative PGAs to preservative-free tafluprost could relieve the symptoms of dry eye [82]. Therefore, preservative-carrying prostaglandin aggravates ocular dryness symptoms, and patients with ocular surface discomforts may benefit from switching to a preservative-free prostaglandin. However, Jess T. Whitson and his colleagues found that there were no significant differences in TBUT and corneal staining among PGAs with different concentration of BAK, including bimatoprost (0.005% BAK), latanoprost (0.02% BAK), and travoprost (sofZia) [47]. Certainly, long-term investigations are needed to evaluate the ocular surface tolerability and optimize the preservative systems in glaucoma medications.

Furthermore, other different kinds of antiglaucomatous agents also contribute to the development of dry eye [62, 83–85], mainly induced by preservatives [62, 68]. And it is reported that dry eye risk may be increased by more than two types of glaucoma medications, particularly in female patients in Taiwan population [86]. Thus, larger and further clinical researches are needed to evade the territorial limitation.

7. Conclusion

In summary, there is indeed a close relationship between PGAs and ocular surface. Despite the effectiveness of controlling IOP, PGAs have a considerable influence on ocular surface of those subjects, whether in anatomical structure of cornea, or in the pathological change in OSD. We have concluded existing studies and opinions in the above five parts. Herein, we try our best to do a warning that IOP measurement should be adjusted due to the corneal properties during the clinical therapy. And a series of ocular surface disorders caused by PGAs should be recognized during follow-up treatment. Therefore, these disadvantages of PGAs encourage us to invent more precise methods recording medicated IOP and to develop more effective and safer antiglaucoma drugs.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81602442).

References

H. A. Quigley, “The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 90, no. 3, pp. 262–267, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Virno, R. Sampaolesi, J. P. Giraldi et al., “Ibopamine: D1-dopaminergic agonist in the diagnosis of glaucoma,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 5–9, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. D. Staso, L. Agnifili, S. Cecannecchia et al., “In vivo analysis of prostaglandins-induced ocular surface and periocular adnexa modifications in patients with glaucoma,” Vivo, vol. 32, 2 pages, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Hashemi, M. Khabazkhoob, P. Nabovati et al., “Distribution of IOP measured with an air puff tonometer in a young population,” Journal of Current Ophthalmology, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 35–41, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Wu, Y. Chen, X. Yu et al., “Changes in corneal biomechanical properties after long-term topical prostaglandin therapy,” PLoS One, vol. 11, no. 5, Article ID e0155527, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Christophe, L. Hong, H. Pascale et al., “The ocular surface of glaucoma patients treated over the long term expresses inflammatory markers related to both T-helper 1 and T-helper 2 pathways,” Ophthalmology, vol. 115, no. 1, pp. 109–115, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Park, J. Shin, and J. Lee, “Relationship between corneal biomechanical properties and structural biomarkers in patients with normal-tension glaucoma: a retrospective study,” BMC Ophthalmology, vol. 18, no. 1, p. 7, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. G. Congdon, A. T. Broman, K. Bandeen-Roche, D. Grover, and H. A. Quigley, “Central corneal thickness and corneal hysteresis associated with glaucoma damage,” American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 141, no. 5, pp. 868–875, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. A. Luce, “Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular response analyzer,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 156–162, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. David, R. Cynthia, K. Julien et al., “Correlations between corneal hysteresis, intraocular pressure, and corneal central pachymetry,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 616–622, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Tsikripis, D. Papaconstantinou, C. Koutsandrea et al., “The effect of prostaglandin analogs on the biomechanical properties and central thickness of the cornea of patients with open-angle glaucoma: a 3-year study on 108 eyes,” Drug Design Development and Therapy, vol. 7, pp. 1149–1156, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. S. Ang, F. Bochmann, J. Townend, and A. Azuara-Blanco, “Corneal biomechanical properties in primary open angle glaucoma and normal tension glaucoma,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 259–262, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Gaspar, L. A. Pinto, and D. C. Sousa, “Corneal properties and glaucoma: a review of the literature and meta-analysis,” Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia, vol. 80, no. 3, p. 202, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. R. Agarwal, J. R. Ehrlich, M. Shimmyo, and N. M. Radcliffe, “The relationship between corneal hysteresis and the magnitude of intraocular pressure reduction with topical prostaglandin therapy,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 96, no. 2, pp. 254–257, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Meda, Q. Wang, D. Paoloni et al., “The impact of chronic use of prostaglandin analogues on the biomechanical properties of the cornea in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 101, no. 2, pp. 120–125, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Mangouritsas, S. Mangouritsas, Mantzounis, and Alexopoulos, “Comparison of Goldmann and Pascal tonometry in relation to corneal hysteresis and central corneal thickness in nonglaucomatous eyes,” Clinical Ophthalmology, vol. 2011, pp. 1071–1077, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Dascalescu, C. Corbu, P. Vasile et al., “The importance of assessing corneal biomechanical properties in glaucoma patients care—a review,” Romanian Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 60, no. 4, p. 219, 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
G. Zisis, L. Georgios, S. Oliver et al., “Biomechanical profile of the cornea in primary congenital glaucoma,” Acta Ophthalmologica, vol. 91, no. 1, pp. e29–e34, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Schlote, A. Tzamalis, and M. Kynigopoulos, “Central corneal thickness during treatment with travoprost 0.004% in glaucoma patients,” Journal of Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 25, no. 5, p. 459, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Sawada, T. Yamamoto, and N. Takatsuka, “Randomized crossover study of latanoprost and travoprost in eyes with open-angle glaucoma,” Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, vol. 250, no. 1, pp. 123–129, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Hatanaka, R. M. Vessani, I. R. Elias, C. Morita, and R. Susanna, “The effect of prostaglandin analogs and prostamide on central corneal thickness,” Journal of Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 51–54, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. M. Birt, Y. M. Buys, A. Kiss, and G. E. Trope, “The influence of central corneal thickness on response to topical prostaglandin analogue therapy,” Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 51–54, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. Michele, T. Serena, B. Paolo et al., “Central corneal thickness and glaucoma treatment: an Italian multicenter cross-sectional study,” Journal of Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 469–473, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Emine, N. Pinar, Y. Alper et al., “Comparison of the effects of latanoprost and bimatoprost on central corneal thickness,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 398–402, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Terai, F. Raiskup, M. Haustein, L. E. Pillunat, and E. Spoerl, “Identification of biomechanical properties of the cornea: the ocular response analyzer,” Current Eye Research, vol. 37, no. 7, pp. 553–562, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Holló, “The side effects of the prostaglandin analogues,” Expert Opinion on Drug Safety, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 45–52, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Chen, T. Dinh, D. F. Woodward et al., “Bimatoprost: mechanism of ocular surface hyperemia associated with topical therapy,” Cardiovascular Therapeutics, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 231–246, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Figus, M. Nardi, P. Piaggi et al., “Bimatoprost 0.01% vs. bimatoprost 0.03%: a 12-month prospective trial of clinical and in vivo confocal microscopy in glaucoma patients,” Eye, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 422–429, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Watson and J. Stjernschantz, “A six-month, randomized, double-masked study comparing latanoprost with timolol in open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension,” Ophthalmology, vol. 103, no. 1, pp. 126–137, 1996.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. L. Fellman, E. K. Sullivan, M. Ratliff et al., “Comparison of travoprost 0.0015% and 0.004% with timolol 0.5% in patients with elevated intraocular pressure,” Ophthalmology, vol. 109, no. 5, pp. 998–1008, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Jean-Marc, B. Christophe, R. Patrice et al., “In vitro study of inflammatory potential and toxicity profile of latanoprost, travoprost, and bimatoprost in conjunctiva-derived epithelial cells,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 46, no. 7, p. 2444, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Eun Joo, K. Yeoun-Hee, K. Sun-Hee et al., “In vitro effects of preservative-free and preserved prostaglandin analogs on primary cultured human conjunctival fibroblast cells,” Korean Journal of Ophthalmology KJO, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 446–453, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Knop and M. Knop, “Influence of the eye-associated lymphoid tissue (EALT) on inflammatory ocular surface disease,” Ocular Surface, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. S-180–S-186, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. M. Franklin and L. E. Remus, “Conjunctival-associated lymphoid tissue: evidence for a role in the secretory immune system,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 181–187, 1984.
View at: Google Scholar
N. Knop and E. Knop, “Regulation of the inflammatory component in chronic dry eye disease by the eye-associated lymphoid tissue (EALT),” Developments in Ophthalmology, vol. 45, pp. 23–39, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Liang, C. Baudouin, A. Labbe et al., “Conjunctiva-associated Lymphoid Tissue (CALT) reactions to antiglaucoma prostaglandins with or without BAK-preservative in rabbit acute toxicity study,” PLoS One, vol. 7, no. 3, Article ID e33913, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Mastropasqua, L. Agnifili, V. Fasanella et al., “The conjunctiva-associated lymphoid tissue in chronic ocular surface diseases,” Microscopy and Microanalysis, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 697–707, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Mastropasqua, V. Fasanella, E. Pedrotti et al., “Trans-conjunctival aqueous humor outflow in glaucomatous patients treated with prostaglandin analogues: an in vivo confocal microscopy study,” Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, vol. 252, no. 9, pp. 1469–1476, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. P. Hae-Young, K. J. Hyun, L. Kyung Min et al., “Effect of prostaglandin analogues on tear proteomics and expression of cytokines and matrix metalloproteinases in the conjunctiva and cornea,” Experimental Eye Research, vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 13–21, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Terai, U. Schlotzer-Schrehardt, J. Lampel et al., “Effect of latanoprost and timolol on the histopathology of the human conjunctiva,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 93, no. 2, pp. 219–224, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Dushku, M. K. John, G. S. Schultz et al., “Pterygia pathogenesis,” Archives of Ophthalmology, vol. 119, no. 5, p. 695, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Baker, F. Amd, D. J. Wilkinson et al., “Protein kinase D3 modulates MMP1 and MMP13 expression in human chondrocytes,” PLoS One, vol. 13, no. 4, Article ID e0195864, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. E. R. D. Carvalho, M. T. Verwoert, I. M. C. Vogels et al., “Involvement of the ubiquitin-proteasome system in the expression of extracellular matrix genes in retinal pigment epithelial cells,” Biochemistry and Biophysics Reports, vol. 13, pp. 83–92, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. R. Mihailovici, R. C. Deliu, C. Margaritescu et al., “Collagen I and III, MMP-1 and TIMP-1 immunoexpression in dilated cardiomyopathy,” Romanian journal of morphology and embryology, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 777–781, 2017.
View at: Google Scholar
E. Ioachim, M. Stefaniotou, S. Gorezis, E. Tsanou, K. Psilas, and N. J. Agnantis, “Immunohistochemical study of extracellular matrix components in epiretinal membranes of vitreoproliferative retinopathy and proliferative diabetic retinopathy,” European Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 384–391, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. J. Servat and C. R. Bernardino, “Effects of common topical antiglaucoma medications on the ocular surface, eyelids and periorbital tissue,” Drugs and Aging, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 267–282, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. T. Whitson, W. B. Trattler, C. Matossian, J. Williams, and D. A. Hollander, “Ocular surface tolerability of prostaglandin analogs in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension,” Journal of Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 287–292, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Pinheiro, C. Panfil, N. Schrage, and R. M. Dutescu, “The impact of glaucoma medications on corneal wound healing,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 122–127, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Noriaki, M. Takatoshi, O. Norio et al., “Comparison of corneal wound healing rates after instillation of commercially available latanoprost and travoprost in rat debrided corneal epithelium,” Journal of Oleo Science, vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 135–141, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Debbasch, P. J. Pisella, S. J. M. De et al., “Museum guidance and classes in art appreciation,” Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art, 1928.
View at: Google Scholar
L. A. Jr, “The lacrimal system,” Survey of Ophthalmology, vol. 7, p. 325, 1962.
View at: Google Scholar
Q. Yang, Y. Zhang, X. Liu, N. Wang, Z. Song, and K. Wu, “A comparison of the effects of benzalkonium chloride on ocular surfaces between C57BL/6 and BALB/c mice,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 18, no. 3, p. 509, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Philippe, L. Frédéric, P. Betty et al., “Distribution of cyclosporine A in ocular tissues after topical administration of cyclosporine A cationic emulsions to pigmented rabbits,” Cornea, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 345–354, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Liang, C. Baudouin, M. O. Faure et al., “Comparison of the ocular tolerability of a latanoprost cationic emulsion versus conventional formulations of prostaglandins: an in vivo toxicity assay,” Molecular Vision, vol. 15, no. 181, p. 1690, 2009.
View at: Google Scholar
L. Hong, B. Christophe, D. Philippe et al., “In vitro and in vivo evaluation of a preservative-free cationic emulsion of latanoprost in corneal wound healing models,” Cornea, vol. 31, no. 11, p. 1319, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. A. Smith, “The epidemiology of dry eye disease: report of the epidemiology subcommittee of the international dry eye workshop (2007),” The Ocular Surface, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 93–107, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. D. Sullivan, L. A. Crews, E. M. Messmer et al., “Correlations between commonly used objective signs and symptoms for the diagnosis of dry eye disease: clinical implications,” Acta Ophthalmologica, vol. 92, no. 2, pp. 161–166, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Vehof, N. Sillevis Smitt-Kamminga, S. A. Nibourg, and C. J. Hammond, “Predictors of discordance between symptoms and signs in dry eye disease,” Ophthalmology, vol. 124, no. 3, pp. 280–286, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Galor, B. E. Seiden, J. J. Park et al., “The association of dry eye symptom severity and comorbid insomnia in US veterans,” Eye and Contact Lens-Science and Clinical Practice, vol. 44, pp. S118–S124, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Hagan, “Biomarkers of ocular surface disease using impression cytology,” Biomarkers in Medicine, vol. 11, no. 12, pp. 1135–1147, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Zhang, M. V. Jeyalatha, Q. Yangluowa et al., “Dry eye management: targeting the ocular surface microenvironment,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 18, no. 7, p. 1398, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. D. Fechtner, D. G. Godfrey, D. Budenz, J. A. Stewart, W. C. Stewart, and M. C. Jasek, “Prevalence of ocular surface complaints in patients with glaucoma using topical intraocular pressure-lowering medications,” Cornea, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 618–621, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Rolle, R. Spinetta, and R. Nuzzi, “Long term safety and tolerability of Tafluprost 0.0015% vs. Timolol 0.1% preservative-free in ocular hypertensive and in primary open-angle glaucoma patients: a cross sectional study,” BMC Ophthalmology, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 136, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Katz, C. Springs, E. Craven, and M. Montecchi-Palmer, “Ocular surface disease in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension treated with either BAK-preserved latanoprost or BAK-free travoprost,” Clinical Ophthalmology, vol. 4, pp. 1253–1261, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. W. Yee, “The effect of drop vehicle on the efficacy and side effects of topical glaucoma therapy: a review,” Current Opinion in Ophthalmology, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 134–139, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Martone, P. Frezzotti, G. M. Tosi et al., “An in vivo confocal microscopy analysis of effects of topical antiglaucoma therapy with preservative on corneal innervation and morphology,” American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 147, no. 4, pp. 725–735.e1, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Ra, M. Ayaki, K. Yuki et al., “Dry eye, sleep quality, and mood status in glaucoma patients receiving prostaglandin monotherapy were comparable with those in non-glaucoma subjects,” PLoS One, vol. 12, no. 11, Article ID e0188534, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. S. Aydin, S. Acikgoz, A. Altun et al., “The effects of topical antiglaucoma drugs as monotherapy on the ocular surface: a prospective study,” Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 2014, Article ID 460483, 8 pages, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. R. Dixon, T. Landry, S. Venkataraman et al., “A 3-month safety and efficacy study of travoprost 0.004% ophthalmic solution compared with timolol in pediatric patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension,” Journal of American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 370–374.e1, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. A. Lemp, L. A. Crews, A. J. Bron, G. N. Foulks, and B. D. Sullivan, “Distribution of aqueous-deficient and evaporative dry eye in a clinic-based patient cohort,” Cornea, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 472–478, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Arita, S. Fukuoka, and N. Morishige, “New insights into the morphology and function of meibomian glands,” Experimental Eye Research, vol. 163, pp. 64–71, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. C. Mocan, E. Uzunosmanoglu, S. Kocabeyoglu, J. Karakaya, and M. Irkec, “The association of chronic topical prostaglandin analog use with meibomian gland dysfunction,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 25, no. 9, pp. 770–774, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Luca, F. Vincenzo, C. Ciro et al., “In vivo confocal microscopy of meibomian glands in glaucoma,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 97, no. 3, pp. 343–349, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Hong, W. Zhu, H. Zhuang et al., “In vivo confocal microscopy of conjunctival goblet cells in patients with Sjogren’s syndrome dry eye,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 94, no. 11, pp. 1454–1458, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Flavia, X. Yangyan, B. Fang et al., “Goblet cells contribute to ocular surface immune tolerance—implications for dry eye disease,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 18, no. 5, p. 978, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Di Staso, L. Agnifili, M. Ciancaglini et al., “In vivo scanning laser confocal microscopy of conjunctival goblet cells in medically-controlled glaucoma,” In Vivo, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 437–443, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Rodolfo, F. Vincenzo, B. Lorenza et al., “In vivo confocal imaging of the conjunctiva as a predictive tool for the glaucoma filtration surgery outcome,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 58, no. 6, Article ID BIO114, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P.-J. Pisella, K. Fillacier, P.-P. Elena, C. Debbasch, and C. Baudouin, “Comparison of the effects of preserved and unpreserved formulations of timolol on the ocular surface of albino rabbits,” Ophthalmic Research, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 3–8, 2000.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. S. Wilson, A. J. Duncan, and J. L. Jay, “Effect of benzalkonium chloride on the stability of the precorneal tear film in rabbit and man,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 59, no. 11, pp. 667–669, 1975.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. V. Kuppens, C. A. de Jong, T. R. Stolwijk, R. J. de Keizer, and J. A. van Best, “Effect of timolol with and without preservative on the basal tear turnover in glaucoma,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 79, no. 4, pp. 339–342, 1995.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
U. Hannu, C. Enping, P. Norbert et al., “Switching from a preserved to a preservative-free prostaglandin preparation in topical glaucoma medication,” Acta Ophthalmologica, vol. 88, no. 3, pp. 329–336, 2010.
View at: Google Scholar
R. Giménez-Gómez, M. R. García-Catalán, and J. M. Gallardo-Galera, “Aclaramiento lagrimal y sintomatología ocular en pacientes tratados con prostaglandinas sin conservantes,” Archivos de la Sociedad Española de Oftalmología, vol. 88, no. 3, pp. 88–91, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Zane, S. R. Wellik, and G. Anat, “Glaucoma therapy and ocular surface disease: current literature and recommendations,” Current Opinion in Ophthalmology, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 136–143, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Saini, M. Vanathi, T. Dada et al., “Ocular surface evaluation in eyes with chronic glaucoma on long term topical antiglaucoma therapy,” International Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 10, no. 6, p. 931, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Villani, M. Sacchi, F. Magnani et al., “The ocular surface in medically controlled glaucoma: an in vivo confocal study,” Investigative Opthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 1003–1010, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Hsin-Yi, L. Cheng-Li, T. Yi-Yu et al., “Association between glaucoma medication usage and dry eye in taiwan,” Optometry and Vision Science, vol. 92, no. 9, pp. e227–e232, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2019 Wencui Shen et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

2759

Downloads

1401

Citations