4.6 Article

Flow Behavior of Heavy Silicone Oil During Eye Movements

Journal

INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE
Volume 55, Issue 12, Pages 8453-8457

Publisher

ASSOC RESEARCH VISION OPHTHALMOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.14-15439

Keywords

emulsification; eye movements; heavy silicone oil; tamponade

Categories

Funding

  1. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/C546679/1, EP/M002209/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PURPOSE. Currently there are various heavy silicone oil (HSO) tamponade agents available for treating inferior retinal diseases. Most of these HSO agents are either homogeneous liquids or a mixture of two components. Variations in their emulsification rates in vivo have been reported. In this study, we investigated their flow behaviors during eye-like movements. METHODS. A model eye chamber filled with various HSO agents was driven to perform eye-like movements. Five types of HSOs with different formulations together with 2 other tamponade agents were tested. Movements of various HSOs inside the chamber were captured by video recording and analyzed. RESULTS. Oxane HD has a larger movement and higher velocity relative to the eye chamber than the less viscous Densiron 68. The behavior of Densiron 68 is similar to that of homogeneous HSO 1.07 and HSO 1.20. Both Oxane HD and 11% silica fluid show very different behaviors compared to the other HSO agents. In addition, 11% silica fluid shows behavior similar to that of F6H8, a low-viscosity tamponade agent. CONCLUSIONS. The viscosity of HSO is not the sole parameter with which to determine the behavior of HSO during eye movements. Various HSOs that are manufactured by mixing different types of base SO and heavy'' additives show distinct flow behaviors. The solubility and stability of the heavy additives in the base SO alter its flow when subjected to eye movements, which may contribute to in vivo emulsification.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available