3.8 Article

Mussel-Inspired Durable Antimicrobial Contact Lenses: The Role of Covalent and Noncovalent Attachment of Antimicrobials

Journal

ACS BIOMATERIALS SCIENCE & ENGINEERING
Volume 6, Issue 5, Pages 3162-3173

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.0c00229

Keywords

contact lenses; mussel-inspired; polydopamine; microbial keratitis; antimicrobial peptide; gamma-mangostin

Funding

  1. Singapore Ministry of Health's National Medical Research Council under its Centre Grant Programme - Optimization of Core Platform Technologies for Ocular Research (INCEPTOR) [NMRC/CG/M010/2017_SERI]
  2. SingHealth Foundation Research Grant [SHF/FG637S/2014]
  3. Singapore National Medical Research Council [NMRC/CBRG/0048/2013]
  4. SNEC Ophthalmic Technologies Incubator Program grant [R1181/83/2014]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Contact lens is a major risk factor for microbial keratitis among contact lens wearers. Chemical strategies that can prevent microbial adhesion and biofilm formation are required to improve a wearer's hygiene and safety. Taking advantage of the material-independent properties of a polydopamine (pDA) coating, we investigated the role of covalent/noncovalent interactions of the antimicrobials and pDA in conferring long-term antimicrobial activities. The developed antimicrobial contact lenses not only retain their antibacterial efficiency against different bacterial strains for 2 weeks but also inhibit microbial adhesion and biofilm formation on the lens surfaces. The designed antimicrobial coatings were found to be safe for ocular cell lines. Moreover, the antimicrobial coatings did not affect the functional and surface properties of coated contact lenses. This methodology can be used to protect the contact lenses from microbial contamination for prolonged periods and has the potential to be extended for designing antimicrobial coatings for other medical devices as well.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available