Corneal endothelial cell damage from XXXX drainage device materials.

@entity4625 @entity726 @entity1346 @entity3460 @entity2945 @entity291
PURPOSE: To compare the level of endothelial damage caused by contact with materials used in contemporary @entity726 drainage devices and a @entity2945 polymer-coated @entity4625 (PC- @entity4625 ). METHODS Standard-sized discs of @entity1346 , @entity4625 (polymethylmethacrylate), and PC- @entity4625 (n = 6) were gently lowered onto cultured @entity291 corneal endothelial (BCE) monolayers using a vacuum suction device. A 2.4-g stainless steel cloning ring weight was then placed on top of each disc. The weights and discs were removed using a vacuum suction device and forceps after 5 minutes of contact. A 0.4% @entity3460 solution was used to stain the cell monolayer to visualize the area of cell damage. The total area of damage in each well (including the area stripped of cells) was measured using an image processor and expressed as a percentage of the total disc area to derive a damage coefficient for each material. Damage coefficients for different materials were compared using Bonferroni corrected analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: Percentage of areas of damage (mean +/- SD) after standardized contact were as follows: @entity4625 , 5.95 +/- 4.60%; @entity1346 , 3.08 +/- 2.68%; PC- @entity4625 , 0.15 +/- 0.25%. @entity4625 caused marked endothelial cell damage. PC- @entity4625 discs produced a significantly lower level (p = 0.04) of endothelial cell trauma. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that PC coating technology may be effective in reducing the rate of corneal endothelial failure following GDD implantation.
