ArticleParasites & vectors2018
Can artificial tears prevent Acanthamoeba keratitis? An in vitro approach.
Article in Parasites & vectors, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe use of contact lenses has increased in recent years as has the incidence of Dry Eye Syndrome, partly due to their use. Artificial tears are the most common treatment option. Since these changes can facilitate Acanthamoeba infection, the present study has been designed to evaluate the effect of three artificial tears treatments in the viability of Acanthamoeba genotype T4 trophozoites. Optava Fusion™, Oculotect®, and Artelac® Splash were selected due to their formulation.
methodsViability was assessed using two staining methods, Trypan Blue stain and CTC stain at different time intervals (2, 4, 6, 8 and 24 h). Trypan Blue viability was obtained by manual count with light microscopy while the CTC stain was determined using flow cytometry.
resultsTrypan Blue staining results demonstrated a decrease in viability for Optava Fusion™ and Artelac® Splash during the first 4 h of incubation. After, this effect seems to lose strength. In the case of Oculotect®, complete cell death was observed after 2 h. Using flow cytometry analysis, Optava Fusion™ and Oculotect® exhibited the same effect observed with Trypan Blue staining. However, Artelac® Splash revealed decreasing cell respiratory activity after four hours, with no damage to the cell membrane.
conclusionsThe present study uses, for the first time, CTC stain analyzed by flow cytometry to establish Acanthamoeba viability demonstrating its usefulness and complementarity with the traditional stain, Trypan Blue. Artelac® Splash, with no preservatives, and Optava Fusion TM, with Purite®, have not shown any useful amoebicidal activity. On the contrary, promising results presented by Ocultect®, with BAK, open up a new possibility for Acanthamoeba keratitis prophylaxis and treatment although in vivo studies should be carried out.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.