I Jalbert1, D F Sweeney, B A Holden. 1. Cornea and Contact Lens Research Unit, School of Optometry and Cooperative Research Centre for Eye Research and Technology, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe the appearance and management of a superior epithelial arcuate lesion (SEAL) observed in association with the wear of a silicone hydrogel lens. METHODS: We present a case of a 30-year-old male who presented with a SEAL after 4 months of wear of a silicone hydrogel lens on a 30-day extended wear schedule. Bacteriological examination of the lenses and ocular adnexa was conducted at the time of the event. The clinical presentation and management are presented and compared to a review of cases associated with hydrogel lenses. RESULTS: The patient presented with symptoms of mild irritation. A linear splitwas noted in the superior peripheral cornea of the affected eye and was associated with limbal injection, stromal infiltrates, and fluorescein staining. Normal ocular biota was recovered from the lenses and eyelids of both eyes. Visual acuity remained unchanged and the lesion resolved following prophylactic treatment and discontinuation of lens wear for 8 days. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis and management of this SEAL case in a silicone hydrogel lens wearer mirrored that of previous events associated with hydrogel lenses. The possible etiologies of SEAL in this case are discussed and include mechanical irritation and dehydration of the lens surface.
PURPOSE: To describe the appearance and management of a superior epithelial arcuate lesion (SEAL) observed in association with the wear of a silicone hydrogel lens. METHODS: We present a case of a 30-year-old male who presented with a SEAL after 4 months of wear of a silicone hydrogel lens on a 30-day extended wear schedule. Bacteriological examination of the lenses and ocular adnexa was conducted at the time of the event. The clinical presentation and management are presented and compared to a review of cases associated with hydrogel lenses. RESULTS: The patient presented with symptoms of mild irritation. A linear splitwas noted in the superior peripheral cornea of the affected eye and was associated with limbal injection, stromal infiltrates, and fluorescein staining. Normal ocular biota was recovered from the lenses and eyelids of both eyes. Visual acuity remained unchanged and the lesion resolved following prophylactic treatment and discontinuation of lens wear for 8 days. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis and management of this SEAL case in a silicone hydrogel lens wearer mirrored that of previous events associated with hydrogel lenses. The possible etiologies of SEAL in this case are discussed and include mechanical irritation and dehydration of the lens surface.
Authors: Loretta Szczotka-Flynn; Jonathan H Lass; Ajay Sethi; Sara Debanne; Beth Ann Benetz; Matthew Albright; Beth Gillespie; Jana Kuo; Michael R Jacobs; Alfred Rimm Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2010-06-10 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Vivek Suganthan Ramasubramanian; S Meenatchi Sundaram; Rinu Thomas; S Ve Ramesh; B Raghuvir Pai; Manali Hazarika; Shah Mohammed Abdul Khader; Rakshath G Poojary; H Girish; Vernon Seth Crasto Journal: J Ophthalmol Date: 2022-05-17 Impact factor: 1.974