Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Share this article on:

Effects of Lens-Care Solutions on Hydrogel Lens Performance

Kitamata-Wong, Britney OD1; Yuen, Tiffany OD1; Li, Wing OD, PhD1,2; Svitova, Tatyana PhD1; Zhou, Yixiu PhD1; Lin, Meng C. OD, PhD1,2*

doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001125
Original Investigations

SIGNIFICANCE Lens care multipurpose solutions (MPSs) can have varying effects on contact lens (CL) surface properties and the corneal epithelium.

PURPOSE The aim of this study was to investigate the short-term effects of newer MPS on CL comfort and dryness, prelens tear-film stability, and ocular-surface health. In vitro study was also performed to assess the effect of MPSs on CL surface properties.

METHODS Acuvue 2 CLs were soaked in control solution, Clear Care (CC), or test solutions: PureMoist, Biotrue, RevitaLens (RL), or saline solution (SS). Over four visits, subjects were exposed to control solution in one eye and to test solution in the contralateral eye for 2 hours using presoaked CLs. Contact lens comfort and dryness, ocular-surface health assessment, prelens noninvasive tear breakup time, and corneal epithelial permeability measured with fluorometry were assessed. Captive-sessile bubble technique evaluated CL wettability and viscous drag in vitro.

RESULTS At 10 minutes, mean comfort ± SD with PureMoist (76 ± 22) was lower than CC (86 ± 15, P = .02), Biotrue (92 ± 9, P < .005), RL (90 ± 13, P < .005), and SS (90 ± 14, P < .005). No other difference in comfort or dryness was noted. RevitaLens was associated with greater corneal epithelial permeability than CC (P = .020) and increased corneal staining compared with all MPSs (P < .005 for all). RevitaLens was also associated with longer prelens noninvasive tear breakup than CC (P < .005). In vitro results agreed with clinical findings of tear-film stability as RL reduced viscous drag. Contact lens surface wettability was enhanced by all MPSs in comparison to SS.

CONCLUSIONS Differences of MPSs on the ocular surface were found in vivo and in vitro. RL caused the greatest corneal epithelium disruption but also associated with higher tear-film stability. The effect of MPSs on CL surface properties in vitro seems to reflect how MPSs altered prelens tear stability.

Supplemental digital content is available in the text.

1Clinical Research Center, School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California

2Vision Science Graduate Program, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California *

Supplemental Digital Content: Appendix Table A1, the baseline values of the subjects in the study, is available at Appendix Table A2, results from the in vivo portion of the study with the multipurpose solutions (Clear Care, PureMoist, Biotrue, RevitaLens, or saline solution [SS]), is available at Each trial represents a control-test solution pairs (e.g., Clear Care vs. PureMoist); the order of the trial for each subject was based on a randomization table. Appendix Table A3, results from the in vitro portion of the study examining the influence of the multipurpose solutions on the contact lens surface in terms of surface tension, advancing water contact angle, adhesion tension, and expansion rate, is available at Surface tension and adhesion tension were measured in terms of millinewton per meter. Appendix Table A4, results from the in vitro portion of the study examining how multipurpose solutions and model tear electrolyte solution affect protein uptake, which was measured as microgram per lens, is available at

Submitted: February 13, 2017

Accepted: June 10, 2017

Funding/Support: Roberta Smith Research Fund (MCL); Clinical Research Center Unrestricted Fund (MCL).

Conflict of Interest Disclosure: None of the authors have reported a conflict of interest.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization: BK-W, TS, MCL; Data Curation: BK-W, WL, TS, MCL; Formal Analysis: BK-W, WL, TS, YZ, MCL; Investigation: BK-W, TY, WL, TS, YZ, MCL; Methodology: BK-W, TY, WL, TS, YZ, MCL; Project Administration: BK-W, TY, MCL; Resources: MCL; Supervision: BK-W, MCL; Visualization: BK-W, WL, TS, MCL; Writing – Original Draft: BK-W, TY, TS, YZ, MCL; Writing – Review & Editing: BK-W, WL, TS, YZ, MCL.

© 2017 American Academy of Optometry