4.2 Article

Effect of Hypotonic 0.18% Sodium Hyaluronate Eyedrops on Inflammation of the Ocular Surface in Experimental Dry Eye

期刊

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/jop.2013.0050

关键词

-

资金

  1. Korea Forest Service [S121313L050100]
  2. Alcon Laboratory, Seoul, Korea

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To investigate the efficacy of hypotonic 0.18% sodium hyaluronate (SH) eyedrops in a mouse model of experimental dry eye (EDE). Methods: EDE was induced in C57BL/6 mice by a subcutaneous scopolamine injection and an air draft. The mice were divided into 4 groups according to topical treatment regimens: EDE control, isotonic 0.5% carboxymethycellulose (CMC), isotonic 0.1% SH, and hypotonic 0.18% SH. Tear volume, corneal smoothness, and corneal staining scores were measured at 5 and 10 days of EDE. Multiplex immunobead assay, immunohistochemistry, and flow cytometry for proinflammatory cytokines, chemokines, and inflammatory molecules were performed at 10 days of EDE. Results: The 0.18% SH group had a significantly lower corneal smoothness and staining scores than the 0.5% CMC and 0.1% SH groups at 10 days of EDE (P < 0.05). The 0.18% SH group showed significantly low levels of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), interleukin (IL)-1 beta, monokine induced by interferon-gamma, and interferon-gamma-inducible protein 10 compared with the other groups (P < 0.05). The mean percentages of CD4(+) CXCR3(+), CD40(+), and CD44(+) cells in the conjunctiva were significantly lower in the 0.18% SH group than in the other groups (P < 0.05). In addition, the 0.1% SH group showed lower levels of TNF-alpha and IL-1 beta and percentages of CD40(+) and CD44(+) cells than the EDE and 0.5% CMC groups. Conclusions: Hypotonic 0.18% SH eyedrops are more effective in improving ocular surface irregularity and staining and decreasing inflammatory cytokines, chemokines, and cells on the ocular surface compared with isotonic 0.5% CMC or 0.1% SH eyedrops in the treatment of EDE.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据