ライフサイエンスコーパス: contact lens

1 o either primary IOL or no IOL implantation (contact lens).

2 ethafilcon hydrogel, which was lathed into a contact lens.

3 ieved 20/17 (1.2); 5 eyes were fitted with a contact lens.

4 lectrodes cured on a silicone elastomer soft contact lens.

5 pplying increasing pressure on the eye via a contact lens.

6 the eye aphakic and focusing the eye with a contact lens.

7 months of age with a primary IOL implant or contact lens.

8 ge NFL thickness before and after use of the contact lens.

9 ministration-approved gas-permeable, scleral contact lens.

10 dicted and was more varied than the hydrogel contact lens.

11 as noted to be a folded, discoloured bandage contact lens.

12 y comparable to the control case without the contact lens.

13 study demonstrated the safety of TM-implant contact lenses.

14 affect the optical and physical property of contact lenses.

15 ium add power, and -1.05 D for single-vision contact lenses.

16 available for review, 287 (99%) did not wear contact lenses.

17 error of each participant was corrected with contact lenses.

18 eases, and P aeruginosa biofilm formation on contact lenses.

19 cy of glaucoma therapy through extended wear contact lenses.

20 25), from molecularly imprinted, therapeutic contact lenses.

21 ch suggested higher drug bioavailability for contact lenses.

22 ophomonas formed a biofilm on the surface of contact lenses.

23 of applications from biological scaffolds to contact lenses.

24 electrical power sources for so called smart contact lenses.

25 th DNase to reduce biofilm formation on test contact lenses.

26 as some UV-blocking ability, albeit minimal) contact lenses.

27 edium add power multifocal and single-vision contact lenses.

28 biofilm plate and on unworn etafilcon A soft contact lenses.

29 dd power (n = 98), or single-vision (n = 98) contact lenses.

30 h myopia and difficulties wearing glasses or contact lenses.

31 ity as an intermittent power source in smart contact lenses.

32 hort period of adaptation to monovision with contact lenses.

33 ible method to fabricate customized hydrogel contact lenses.

34 d at least 1 additional intraocular surgery (contact lens, 21%; IOL, 72%; P < .001).

35 ns, 6 [11%]; IOL, 7 [13%]; P = .99), Randot (contact lens, 3 [6%]; IOL, 1 [2%]; P = .62), or Titmus (

36 ic manipulation in 1 of 23 patients (using a contact lens; 4%; 95% CI, 0%-22%).

37 east 1 adverse event after cataract surgery (contact lens, 56%; IOL, 81%; P = .02).

38 psis between the 2 treatment groups: Frisby (contact lens, 6 [11%]; IOL, 7 [13%]; P = .99), Randot (c

39 s, 3 [6%]; IOL, 1 [2%]; P = .62), or Titmus (contact lens, 8 [15%]; IOL, 13 [23%]; P = .34).

40 onic manipulation (using iseikonic lenses or contact lenses), a MIN lens, or epiretinal membrane (ERM

41 The contact lens and IOL groups were not significantly diffe

42 ncorporated into a conventional, transparent contact lens and provide for sustained and effective bac

43 ) was carried out first without the use of a contact lens and then repeated with placement of the con

44 as aeruginosa isolates were obtained from 36 contact lenses and 14 contact lens protective fluid samp

45 s, semi-transparent 'smart' glasses, 'smart' contact lenses and artificial retina devices.

46 nts to disrupt pathogenic biofilms formed on contact lenses and as a treatment for established cornea

47 This is the first study to identify contact lenses and more specifically silicone hydrogels,

48 tep toward achieving self-powered electronic contact lenses and ocular devices with an integrated pow

49 Compared with ocular lubrication, bandage contact lenses and punctal plugs were more effective in

50 To compare the effectiveness of bandage contact lenses and punctal plugs with ocular lubricants

51 Recycling of the contact lenses and their packaging amounted to only 0.04

52 The contact lenses and their release media were tested in an

53 eparate experiments, we demonstrate that (1) contact lenses and trial lenses induce indistinguishable

54 added in the presence of a silicone hydrogel contact lens, and we examined corneal inflammation by co

55 lantation technology to treat glaucoma using contact lenses, and could serve as a platform for other

56 If only one half of the patients in the contact lens (aphakic) group eventually undergo secondar

57 Bandage contact lenses are commonly used by ophthalmic practitio

58 Contact lenses are ideally suited for controlled drug de

59 Contact lenses are increasingly used in laboratories for

60 ver, the choices from commercially available contact lenses are rather limited.

61 an gland heating and expression, and scleral contact lenses are some of the latest options available

62 Using a sterile soft contact lens as scaffold, the tissue was loaded in this

63 s aeruginosa isolates are mainly involved in contact lens associated infections.

64 lates from contact lens of the patients with contact lens associated infections.

65 uently isolated from lenses of patients with contact lens-associated corneal infiltrates.

66 A contact lens avoided cataract development and resulted i

67 up to 100 degrees (ultra-wide-field) using a contact lens-based approach in a single 2-second scan.

68 Bandage contact lens (BCL) was applied at the end of the procedu

69 any glasses users having tried and abandoned contact lenses because of latent dry eye problems.

70 The contact lens biofuel cell presented here is a step towar

71 Contact lens biofuel cell testing was performed in a syn

72 A contact lens biofuel cell was fabricated using buckypape

73 lease duration of timolol from ACUVUE TruEye contact lenses by incorporating vitamin E diffusion barr

74 t, and selection of a different size bandage contact lens can help reduce shunt-associated complicati

75 sure (IOP) of timolol from the ACUVUE TruEye contact lenses can be significantly increased by incorpo

76 Commercial contact lenses cannot provide extended delivery of ophth

77 1999 and 2014 who had documented exposure to contact lens care disinfecting solutions or artificial t

78 ty of Acanthamoeba trophozoites and cysts to contact lens care systems has been developed.

79 Multi-species biofilms associated with contact lens cases and lenses can predispose individuals

80 Contact lens cases and lenses from 28 patients referred

81 disease and bacteria residing in biofilms of contact lens cases and lenses.

82 e diversity of bacterial types isolated from contact lens cases.

83 - 0.16] in 1 year) and novel multifocal soft contact lenses (change in refraction: -0.15D, [- 0.27 to

84 analyzed relative to treated vs fellow eye, contact lens (CL) vs intraocular lens (IOL), visual acui

85 is detailing demographics, risk factors, and contact lens (CL) wearing habits was completed for 23 ca

86 Since the 2005-2006 outbreak of contact lens (CL)-associated Fusarium keratitis, there m

87 eye, visual outcome, and treatment modality (contact lens [CL] vs. intraocular lens [IOL]).

88 low-dose contact lenses (CLLO) and high-dose contact lenses (CLHI) were produced by encapsulating a t

89 Latanoprost-eluting low-dose contact lenses (CLLO) and high-dose contact lenses (CLHI

90 duction in artificial tear use, and improved contact lens comfort in patients with dry eye.

91 ocular-surface status, artificial tear use, contact lens comfort, and tear break-up time.

92 ical and human health risks, with disposable contact lenses constituting a potential high-volume poll

93 from 63% at baseline to 54% at year 3 in the contact lens control group, whereas 88% of former contac

94 ctacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), best contact lens-corrected visual acuity (BCLVA), Scheimpflu

95 cle corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) and hard contact lens-corrected visual acuity (CLVA).

96 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-15.8) and contact lens correction (OR, 5.74; 95% CI, 1.37-24.1).

97 a wider range of axial myopia to discern if contact lens correction has a greater effect on the high

98 With contact lens correction, there was no significant differ

99 to either primary intraocular lens (IOL) or contact lens correction.

100 kely that the family will be successful with contact lens correction.

101 expensive than cataract surgery coupled with contact lens correction.

102 implantation was $14 752 versus $10 726 with contact lens correction.

103 Contact lens costs accounted for 15% ($1600/patient) in

104 An econazole-eluting contact lens could be used as a treatment for fungal ocu

105 in epithelial permeability can be caused by contact lens CW, despite the elimination of hypoxia.

106 ; this should be taken into consideration in contact lens design, IOL selection, and in the optimizat

107 patients had a history of recent exposure to contact lens disinfecting solutions (Opti-Free, Equate)

108 Contact lens drug delivery may become an option for the

109 ION: A patient was applied a pair of bandage contact lenses due to persistent ocular pain secondary t

110 eye from light exposure by applying a black contact lens during waking hours for >/=12 months.

111 The soft contact lens edge fitting was characterized by the conju

112 from one eye of each subject using a bipolar contact-lens electrode.

113 ed a study-specific baseline survey during a contact lens examination or while being evaluated as a c

114 se in marmosets raised on +5 D single vision contact lenses (exp-con mean MSE +/- SE +1.62 +/- 0.44 D

115 cantly (P < 0.001) to the prediction of soft contact lens fit compared with keratometry and videokera

116 hitecture provide valuable insight into soft contact lens fit dynamics.

117 virgin eyes, and some cases may benefit from contact lens fitting.

118 n 10 of 178 eyes (5.6%), sometimes requiring contact lens fitting.

119 f drug is maintained in the tear film from a contact lens for an extended period of time for the enti

120 1.00, - 0.50, 0.00 and + 1.00D) induced with contact lenses for each participant.

121 134 participants who refused to remove their contact lenses for the refraction measurement, 4430 adul

122 umber of patients with adverse events in the contact lens group increased (15 to 24) in postoperative

123 spect occurred in 35% of treated eyes in the contact lens group vs 28% of eyes in the IOL group (P =

124 16%, P < .0001) in the IOL group than in the contact lens group.

125 ce tomography in rats wearing our customized contact lenses has the quality comparable to the control

126 nowledge, no other cases of retained bandage contact lens have previously been reported in the litera

127 iled to heal with extended silicone hydrogel contact lenses healed with PROSE.

128 race, body mass index, use of spectacles or contact lenses, history of allergic eye disease, or preg

129 patients were initially treated with bandage contact lens; however, continuous silicone hydrogel lens

130 g treatment of aphakia with a primary IOL or contact lens in 114 infants with a unilateral congenital

131 g treatment of aphakia with a primary IOL or contact lens in 114 infants with unilateral congenital c

132 and area under curve (AUC), with TM-implant contact lenses in comparison to eye drop therapy.

133 ed shapes, and benefit the laboratorial-used contact lenses in pre-clinical studies.

134 te rabbits were fit with P. aeruginosa laden contact lenses in the absence of a penetrating wound.

135 e environmental fate and mass inventories of contact lenses in the United States.

136 fort drop, instilled before the insertion of contact lenses, in a population of symptomatic contact l

137 Asians appear to be more susceptible to contact lens-induced epithelial changes than do non-Asia

138 acterial load in the corneal epithelium in a contact lens infection model in the rabbit.

139 Indications for surgery included contact lens intolerance or poor corrected visual acuity

140 s with progressive, advanced keratoconus and contact lens intolerance underwent the procedure with no

141 h clinical diagnosis of keratoconus who were contact lens intolerant and whose corrected distance vis

142 results indicate that use of a senofilcon A contact lens is beneficial in protecting ocular tissues

143 Sustained delivery of latanoprost by contact lenses is at least as effective as delivery with

144 ations in whom accessing or managing aphakic contact lenses is challenging.

145 successful option to correct presbyopia with contact lenses is monovision.

146 ous-drug diffusion coefficients in five soft-contact-lens material hydrogels where solute-specific ad

147 ction, was determined (130 mJ/cm(2)), 6 soft contact lens materials (etafilcon A, senofilcon A, galyf

148 The 'upper fornix trap', where the contact lens may be retained by the upper tarsal edge, p

149 Moreover, soft contact lenses may be more likely to retain asymptomatic

150 d the affected eyes fitted with compensatory contact lenses (mean duration of deprivation = 4.4 month

151 aring single vision (SV) and multifocal soft contact lenses (MFCL).

152 lm formation was assessed using our in vitro contact lens model and in vivo murine model.

153 are with ocular lubricants (n = 38), bandage contact lenses (n = 33), or punctal plugs (n = 33).

154 tial of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from contact lens of the patients with contact lens associate

155 Ten marmosets were reared with multizone contact lenses of alternating powers (-5 diopters [D]/+5

156 wed that IOP reduction from baseline by pure contact lens on daily basis was comparable with that by

157 Sixteen marmosets were reared with a -5D contact lens on their right eye (plano on contralateral

158 hange at the anterior corneal surface, using contact lenses, on the location of the scan path and mea

159 in all participants bilaterally by means of contact lens ophthalmodynamometry.

160 come a new prophylactic agent for preventing contact lens or trauma/injury-associated microbial kerat

161 covering by senofilcon A class 1 UV-blocking contact lenses or lotrafilcon A non-UV-blocking (lotrafi

162 with visual outcomes similar to outcomes for contact lenses or spectacles for children who had both b

163 Each received monovision spectacles, contact lenses, or both with distance correction in the

164 ment of the ocular surface ecosystem (PROSE) contact lenses, or both.

165 f activated neutrophils by 79.2% on hydrogel contact lenses (P < 0.001).

166 lth, having diabetes, and wearing glasses or contact lenses (p < 0.05).

167 ts (life-table estimate, 74.5%) treated with contact lenses (P = 0.59).

168 involving direct contact with the eye as the contact lenses platform.

169 HEMA-based contact lenses polymerized with nanosphere/cipro were tr

170 .52%/D, r = 0.97, P < 0.01) with increase in contact lens power (-12 to +8).

171 e scaling, were not related significantly to contact lens power (863 mum(2)/D, r = 0.06, P = 0.47).

172 Contact lens power can be estimated using an A-constant

173 Different types of contact lenses presented different levels of conjunctiva

174 ee RNFL scans were repeated with 10 separate contact lenses, (Proclear daily, Omafilcon A/60%) rangin

175 lace scarred tarsal conjunctiva, specialized contact lenses (PROSE), conjunctival replacement surgery

176 Eyes irradiated with no contact lens protection showed corneal epithelial cell l

177 were obtained from 36 contact lenses and 14 contact lens protective fluid samples.

178 Econazole-eluting contact lenses provided extended antifungal activity aga

179 The contaminated contact lens provides Pseudomonas aeruginosa an ideal si

180 anoparticle-based formulations, drug-eluting contact lenses, punctum inserts and bioadhesive matrices

181 o untreated, and -5 D and +5 D single vision contact lens-reared marmosets.

182 teral blurring induced by wearing monovision contact lenses reduces feed-forward activity in the prim

183 lated from cases and lenses of patients with contact lens-related corneal disease.

184 ess the relationship between the severity of contact lens-related disease and bacteria residing in bi

185 drawing attention to their emerging role in contact lens-related disease.

186 ses and lenses can predispose individuals to contact lens-related inflammatory complications.

187 decreases the severity and susceptibility of contact lens-related keratitis.

188 ard increased susceptibility and severity of contact lens-related keratitis.

189 Contact lens-related microbial keratitis increased in Ta

190 opic defocus simultaneously using concentric contact lenses resulted in relatively smaller and less m

191 We report a case of folded bandage contact lens retained for six and a half years in the up

192 buds, and maintaining clinical suspicion of contact lens retention.

193 ) with and without their Rigid Gas Permeable contact lenses (RGP CL's) and 20 age-matched controls, u

194 effectiveness of orthokeratology versus soft contact lenses, rigid gas permeable lenses, and spectacl

195 stant inter-participant RIS in mm), and (ii) contact lenses (RIS changed with axial length).

196 implant) and implanted the same in hydrogel contact lenses (sandwich system).

197 te in situ corneal oxygen uptake during soft-contact-lens (SCL) wear using a micro-polarographic Clar

198 We used a contact lens sensor (CLS) to measure change in limbal st

199 ctuations were measured for 24 hours using a contact lens sensor (CLS).

200 taB2-crystallin, and G3PDH, and UV-absorbing contact lenses significantly prevented these alterations

201 ia, treatment with high add power multifocal contact lenses significantly reduced the rate of myopia

202 ater (OR, 16.00; P = 0.001), and topping off contact lens solution in the case (OR, 4.80; P = 0.01).

203 A total of 20 of 233 (8.6 %) contact lens solution specimens collected from 16 patien

204 performed to determine whether multipurpose contact lens solutions (MPCLSs) can cause increased infe

205 Between 2009 and 2014, the contact lens solutions collected from patients presentin

206 The repertoire of protozoa in contact lens solutions is larger than previously known.

207 The repertoire of free-living protozoa in contact lens solutions is poorly known despite the fact

208 particularly with cysticidal activity in the contact lens solutions.

209 reported for the first time as contaminating contact lens solutions.

210 Based on our data, the use of a contact lens statistically improved the signal strength

211 , possible treatment options were iris print contact lenses, sunglasses, and simple iris prostheses.

212 compression of the cornea using a flat rigid contact lens sutured to the cornea during the treatment

213 properties or cytotoxicity tests in any soft contact lenses tested.

214 To develop extended wear contact lenses that can also provide extended glaucoma t

215 ellulose nanoparticle-laden ring in hydrogel contact lenses that could provide controlled drug delive

216 Extended wear contact lenses that deliver glaucoma drugs for extended

217 /cipro was then incorporated into HEMA-based contact lenses that were tested for growth inhibition of

218 With the use of a contact lens, the average NFL thickness was significantl

219 is important to replicate these effects with contact lenses, the most common method for delivering mo

220 lens and then repeated with placement of the contact lens to correct for the spherical equivalent of

221 We evaluated the effectiveness of a contact lens to increase the signal strength and to asse

222 te the ability of a class I UV-blocking soft contact lens to protect against UVB-induced effects on t

223 t to the idea of using concentric multifocal contact lenses to appropriately manipulate peripheral re

224 a suitable power source for glucose-sensing contact lenses to be used for continuous health monitori

225 drogels have many applications, ranging from contact lenses to tissue engineering scaffolds.

226 onfidence interval [CI], 1.33-2.11), current contact lens use (OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.53-2.64), allergie

227 nt for time-varying psychological stress and contact lens use and selection bias from dropout.

228 e, a compromised ocular surface, and bandage contact lens use are associated with MDR-PA keratitis.

229 tion background and pay further attention to contact lens use in pediatric patients.

230 Soft contact lens use in the past 2 weeks or rigid gas-permea

231 of a compromised ocular surface, and bandage contact lens use were associated with MDR-PA keratitis.

232 eal phacoemulsification, myopia >6 diopters, contact lens use, and corneal abnormality.

233 for microbial keratitis during 2008-2012 was contact lens use, and the infection rate significantly i

234 ographic data, indication for K-Pro, bandage contact lens use, prophylactic antibiotic use, timing an

235 4% of the total waste volume associated with contact lens use.

236 d nighttime visual disturbances among former contact lens users and former glasses users.

237 Most contact lens users had worn them successfully >/=5 years

238 e differential diagnosis of keratitis in all contact lens users with keratitis, particularly before m

239 much more frequent and are not restricted to contact lens users.

240 rsal edge, presents an anatomical hazard for contact lens users.

241 At her subsequent visit, bandage contact lens was removed from her left eye, but none was

242 icacy of timolol delivered via extended wear contact lenses was then compared to eye drops in beagle

243 athy, and their use, particularly of bandage contact lenses, was associated with significant healing

244 %]), organic matter trauma (9/49 [18%]), and contact lens wear (3/49 [6%]).

245 clinical risk factor for keratitis included contact lens wear (79%).

246 significantly increased relative to baseline contact lens wear but was significantly increased relati

247 cal vancomycin use, topical steroid use, and contact lens wear did not increase the incidence of infe

248 res, including lubrication and discontinuing contact lens wear in 4 patients (4 eyes), whereas in 11

249 e included contact lens wear only (13 eyes), contact lens wear in the setting of ocular rosacea (3 ey

250 ome, and propose a theoretical model for how contact lens wear might change those interactions to ena

251 Causes of the LSC disease included contact lens wear only (13 eyes), contact lens wear in t

252 des of research focused on understanding how contact lens wear predisposes to P aeruginosa infection,

253 Contact lens wear remained the most common predisposing

254 se, history of ocular surgery or trauma, and contact lens wear within 2 weeks of image acquisition we

255 %) comprised the control group who continued contact lens wear, 819 (45%) wore contacts at baseline a

256 a included past ocular surgery, recent rigid contact lens wear, and corneal scarring.

257 Compared with contact lens wear, current LASIK technology improved eas

258 Compared with continued contact lens wear, LASIK significantly reduced the self-

259 s (12 patients each: dry eye syndrome [DES], contact lens wear, post-laser refractive surgery, and ke

260 s a viable option for the management of soft contact lens wear-related limbal stem cell deficiency in

261 ion with systemic immunosuppression for soft contact lens wear-related limbal stem cell deficiency.

262 ere compared with conventional daytime rigid contact lens wear.

263 us, potentially allowing continued long-term contact lens wear.

264 athies that may occur in dry eye disease and contact lens wear.

265 otentially blinding microbial keratitis from contact lens wear.

266 rneal infections following trauma and during contact lens wear.

267 have chronic difficulties with spectacle or contact lens wear.

268 state corneal oxygen uptake rate during soft-contact-lens wear.

269 neal-oxygen-uptake rates during in vivo soft-contact-lens wear.

270 None was a corneal-contact lens wearer, one had previous cataract surgery a

271 r development of serious infections, such as contact lens wearers (P = 0.21) or patients with human i

272 ct lens control group, whereas 88% of former contact lens wearers and 77% of former glasses wearers w

273 nosa bacterial infection, commonly occurs in contact lens wearers and may lead to vision impairment.

274 Thirty-nine neophytes and soft contact lens wearers completed the study.

275 It is well documented that contact lens wearers have much higher incidences of corn

276 gonorrhea or chlamydia and conjunctivitis in contact lens wearers should be treated with antibiotics.

277 Cases and lenses from nine asymptomatic contact lens wearers were processed in a manner similar

278 Controls were RGP contact lens wearers with no history of AK who were at l

279 orneal infections compared with those of non-contact lens wearers, although the exact cause(s) of thi

280 It is commonly associated with contact lens wearers, and prevalence is increasing at an

281 itis, a rare eye disease primarily affecting contact lens wearers, is caused by free-living amebae, A

282 ntact lenses, in a population of symptomatic contact lens wearers.

283 Only 2 patients were contact lens wearers: however, they presented with histo

284 erent during SCL and RGPL wearing in IN, and contact lens wearing does not significantly reduce nysta

285 ls, cultured human corneal epithelial cells, contact lens-wearing animal models, and bacterial geneti

286 Patients were RGP contact lens-wearing United States residents with a diag

287 The bandage contact lenses were changed every 4 days, whereas the pu

288 Curved contact lenses were created by encapsulating econazole-i

289 n from further visit stated that the bandage contact lenses were no longer in situ.

290 Conversely, non-UV-blocking contact lenses were not protective.

291 y(HEMA-co-AA-co-AM-co-NVP-co-PEG200DMA) soft contact lenses were prepared (100+/-5 mum thickness, dia

292 Four different types of soft contact lenses were randomly fitted to both eyes of each

293 Four different types of soft contact lenses were tested on the left eye of 10 subject

294 Trauma and contact lenses were the main predisposing factors.

295 Contact lenses were used to correct aphakia in patients

296 ate an IOL exchange or wearing spectacles or contact lenses with a large refractive correction.

297 cost and the lead time for fabricating soft contact lenses with customized shapes, and benefit the l

298 e presence of neutrophils to form biofilm on contact lenses within a short time.

299 n of the surgeon, the cost and handling of a contact lens would be so burdensome as to result in sign

300 e discusses the utility of hydrogels in soft contact lens, wound dressings, intraocular lens, vitreou