4.3 Article

Cytoprotective effects of a blue light-filtering intraocular lens on human retinal pigment epithelium by reducing phototoxic effects on vascular endothelial growth factor-α, Bax, and Bcl-2 expression

Journal

JOURNAL OF CATARACT AND REFRACTIVE SURGERY
Volume 35, Issue 2, Pages 354-362

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2008.10.052

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PURPOSE: To compare the possible protective effects oft he ultraviolet (UV)-filtering and blue light-filtering SN60AT intraocular lens (IOL) and the untinted UV-filtering SA60AT IOL with regard to light-induced stress on human retinal pigment epithelium (RPE). SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany. METHODS: Primary human RPE cells were exposed to white light, and a tinted or untinted IOL was placed in the light beam. After 15 to 60 minutes of irradiation, cell viability was determined by a colorimetric test (tetrazolium dye-reduction assay) and a microscopic live/dead assay. The expression of vascular endothelial growth factor-alpha (VEGF-alpha), Bax, and Bcl-2 and their mRNA was determined by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and Western blotting. RESULTS: Without an IOL, white-light exposure decreased cell viability compared with the decrease with the nonirradiated control in a time-dependent manner. Light-induced cell death was significantly reduced by both the tinted IOL and untinted IOL. The combined UV and blue-light filtering attenuated light-induced cell damage significantly more than UV filtering alone. Results of RTPCR and Western blotting showed a significant time-dependent decrease in Bcl-2 and increase in Bax and VEGF-alpha that were significantly less with the tinted IOL than with the untinted IOL. CONCLUSIONS: Both IOLs reduced light-induced RPE damage. The UV- and blue light-filtering IOL reduced damage more than the conventional IOL. This supports the hypothesis that blue light-filtering IOLs may prevent retinal damage in clinical use.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available