Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172014
DC FieldValue
dc.titleEarly wound healing and refractive response of different pocket configurations following presbyopic inlay implantation
dc.contributor.authorKonstantopoulos A.
dc.contributor.authorLiu Y.-C.
dc.contributor.authorTeo E.P.W.
dc.contributor.authorLwin N.C.
dc.contributor.authorYam G.H.F.
dc.contributor.authorMehta J.S.
dc.date.accessioned2019-11-06T07:40:12Z
dc.date.available2019-11-06T07:40:12Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.citationKonstantopoulos A., Liu Y.-C., Teo E.P.W., Lwin N.C., Yam G.H.F., Mehta J.S. (2017). Early wound healing and refractive response of different pocket configurations following presbyopic inlay implantation. PLoS ONE 12 (2) : e0172014. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172014
dc.identifier.issn19326203
dc.identifier.urihttps://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/161528
dc.description.abstractBackground Presbyopic inlays have mostly been implanted under a corneal flap. Implantation in a pocket has advantages including less postoperative dry eye and neurotrophic effect, and better biomechanical corneal stability. This study investigated the effect of different pocket and flocket dimensions on corneal stability and refractive power after Raindrop™ implantation, and the associated wound healing response. Methodology Ten New Zealand White rabbits had bilateral pocket Raindrop™ implantation. Eyes were allocated to 4 groups: pockets with 4mm, 6mm, and 8mm diameters, and 8mm flocket. They were examined pre-operatively, at day 1, weeks 1, 2, 3 and 4 post-surgery with anterior segment optical coherence tomography, corneal topography and in-vivo confocal microscopy. After euthanasia (week 4), CD11b, heat shock protein (HSP) 47 and fibronectin corneal immunohistochemistry was performed. Results Corneal thickness (mean±SD) increased from 360.0±16.2?m pre-operatively to 383.9±32.5, 409.4±79.3, 393.6±35.2, 396.4±50.7 and 405±20.3?m on day 1, weeks 1,2,3 and 4 respectively (p<0.008, all time-points). Corneal refractive power increased by 11.1±5.5, 7.5±2.5, 7.5±3.1, 7.0±3.6 and 6.3±2.9D (p<0.001). Corneal astigmatism increased from 1.1±0.3D to 2.3±1.6, 1.7±0.7, 1.8±1.0, 1.6±0.9 and 1.6±0.9D respectively (p = 0.033). CT, refractive power change and astigmatism were not different between groups. The 8mm pocket and 8mm flocket groups had the least stromal keratocyte reflectivity. CD11b, fibronectin or HSP47 weren't detected. Conclusions Anatomical and refractive stability was achieved by 1 week; the outcomes were not affected by pocket or flocket configuration. No scarring or inflammation was identified. The 8mm pocket and flocket showed the least keratocyte activation, suggesting they might be the preferred configuration. © 2017 Konstantopoulos et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.sourceUnpaywall 20191101
dc.subjectfibronectin
dc.subjectheat shock protein 47
dc.subjectfibronectin
dc.subjectheat shock protein 47
dc.subjectanimal experiment
dc.subjectanimal model
dc.subjectanimal tissue
dc.subjectArticle
dc.subjectastigmatism
dc.subjectconfocal microscopy
dc.subjectcontrolled study
dc.subjectcornea cell
dc.subjectcornea thickness
dc.subjecteye surgery
dc.subjectimmunohistochemistry
dc.subjectimplantation
dc.subjectin vivo study
dc.subjectinlay implantation
dc.subjectkeratometry
dc.subjectlimit of quantitation
dc.subjectnonhuman
dc.subjectophthalmological prosthesis
dc.subjectoptical coherence tomography
dc.subjectpreoperative period
dc.subjectpresbyopia
dc.subjectwound healing
dc.subjectanimal
dc.subjectastigmatism
dc.subjectbiomechanics
dc.subjectcornea
dc.subjectcornea stroma
dc.subjectinflammation
dc.subjectkeratometry
dc.subjectLeporidae
dc.subjectmetabolism
dc.subjectphysiology
dc.subjectpresbyopia
dc.subjectrefractometry
dc.subjectsurgical flaps
dc.subjectwound healing
dc.subjectAnimals
dc.subjectAstigmatism
dc.subjectBiomechanical Phenomena
dc.subjectCornea
dc.subjectCorneal Stroma
dc.subjectCorneal Topography
dc.subjectFibronectins
dc.subjectHSP47 Heat-Shock Proteins
dc.subjectImmunohistochemistry
dc.subjectInflammation
dc.subjectMicroscopy, Confocal
dc.subjectPreoperative Period
dc.subjectPresbyopia
dc.subjectRabbits
dc.subjectRefractometry
dc.subjectSurgical Flaps
dc.subjectWound Healing
dc.typeArticle
dc.contributor.departmentDUKE-NUS MEDICAL SCHOOL
dc.contributor.departmentDEAN'S OFFICE (DUKE-NUS MEDICAL SCHOOL)
dc.description.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0172014
dc.description.sourcetitlePLoS ONE
dc.description.volume12
dc.description.issue2
dc.description.pagee0172014
dc.published.statePublished
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications
Elements

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
10_1371_journal_pone_0172014.pdf1.71 MBAdobe PDF

OPEN

NoneView/Download

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

8
checked on Jun 21, 2022

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

8
checked on Oct 4, 2021

Page view(s)

220
checked on Jun 23, 2022

Download(s)

1
checked on Jun 23, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons