Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30357549›Full record

ArticleJournal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection2018

Comparative in vitro effectiveness of a novel contact lens multipurpose solution on Acanthamoeba castellanii.

Alyssa C Fears, Rebecca C Metzinger, Stephanie Z Killeen, Robert S Reimers, Chad J Roy

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Expert review of anti-infective therapy · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Inactivation ofMicroorganisms · 2021
    Article
  5. Variables Affecting the Recovery ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Frontiers in microbiology · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alyssa C FearsDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Tulane School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, 70102, USA.
Rebecca C MetzingerDepartment of Ophthalmology, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, 70102, USA.
Stephanie Z KilleenDivision of Microbiology, Tulane National Primate Research Center, Covington, LA, 70433, USA.
Robert S ReimersDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, Tulane School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, LA, 70102, USA.
Chad J RoyDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Tulane School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, 70102, USA. croy@tulane.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1710-6974
Tulane University · US

Funding

Tulane NPRC SPF Sheltered Outdoor Enclosure ExpansionP51OD011104 · OD · TULANE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISIANA · PI L Lee HAMM · 2012 to 2026
$142.4M
NIH HHS P51 OD011104NIH Office of the Director OD0111401
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA multipurpose contact lens cleaning solution (MPS) containing novel active ingredients under development was compared to two commercially available MPS solutions for effectiveness against Acanthamoeba isolates.

methodsThe Acanthamoeba isolate A. castellanii was propagated for trophozoite or cyst-containing cultures for the purpose of assessment of effectiveness of each MPS. An alamar blue-based cellular respiration assay was used to assess effectiveness against trophozoites; Trypan blue hemocytometer-based microscopic counts measured cysticidal effects. To assess the general antimicrobial potency of each solution as controls for the anti-amoebic assays, comparative bactericidal effectiveness using Serratia marcenses was also performed.

resultsMinimal effectiveness against either Acanthamoeba form was observed from either commercial MPS. In contrast, the novel MPS achieved complete kill within 1 h contact time for both Acanthamoeba trophozoite and cysts. Each commercial MPS required 6 h contact time to achieve a two to three log reduction in S. marcenses. In contrast, the experimental MPS achieved disinfection in 60 min contact time, and complete kill (< 1 CFU) at 90 min.

conclusionsResults suggest that the inclusion of a novel ingredient combination within the MPS under development clearly is required and is ideal for rapid and effective killing of Acanthamoeba species in the context of contact lens disinfection systems. The representative commercially available MPS used in this testing provided minimal effectiveness against the protozoa regardless of contact time. In addition, comparative results with the bacterial agent in the control study show distinct differences in the speed to disinfection with the novel MPS. Future MPS development should consider inclusion of novel chemical entities that are effective against Acanthamoeba species to speed disinfection and further reduce the exposure potential of users of contact lenses and cleaning systems.

Indexed as

Acanthamoeba keratitisAlamar blueBioTrueIn vitro effectivenessOpti Free

Identifiers

PMID30357549
PMCPMC6200833
OpenAlexW2898469829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.