4.6 Article

A Drug-Eluting Contact Lens

期刊

INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE
卷 50, 期 7, 页码 3346-3352

出版社

ASSOC RESEARCH VISION OPHTHALMOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.08-2826

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute of General Medical Sciences [GM073626]
  2. National Institutes of Health [EB-00351]
  3. Boston KPro Fund
  4. Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary
  5. CIMIT/J&J ( Center for Integration of Medicine and Innovative Technology/Johnson & Johnson) Young Investigator Award

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE. To formulate and characterize a drug-eluting contact lens designed to provide extended, controlled release of a drug. METHODS. Prototype contact lenses were created by coating PLGA (poly[lactic-co-glycolic acid]) films containing test compounds with pHEMA (poly[hydroxyethyl methacrylate]) by ultraviolet light polymerization. The films, containing encapsulated fluorescein or ciprofloxacin, were characterized by scanning electron microscopy. Release studies were conducted in phosphate-buffered saline at 37 degrees C with continuous shaking. Ciprofloxacin eluted from the contact lens was studied in an antimicrobial assay to verify antimicrobial effectiveness. RESULTS. After a brief and minimal initial burst, the prototype contact lenses demonstrated controlled release of the molecules studied, with zero-order release kinetics under infinite sink conditions for over 4 weeks. The rate of drug release was controlled by changing either the ratio of drug to PLGA or the molecular mass of the PLGA used. Both the PLGA and the pHEMA affected release kinetics. Ciprofloxacin released from the contact lenses inhibited ciprofloxacin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus at all time-points tested. CONCLUSIONS. A prototype contact lens for sustained drug release consisting of a thin drug-PLGA film coated with pHEMA could be used as a platform for ocular drug delivery with widespread therapeutic applications. (Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50:3346-3352) DOI:10.1167/iovs.08-2826

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

4.6
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