Nathan Efron1, Philip B Morgan. 1. Eurolens Research, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. n.efron@qut.edu.au
Abstract
PURPOSE: A schema has recently been described for clinical differentiation among 4 symptomatic subtypes of contact lens-associated corneal infiltrative events (CIEs): microbial keratitis (MK), contact lens-induced peripheral ulcer (CLPU), contact lens-induced acute red eye (CLARE), and infiltrative keratitis (IK). The clinical utility of this schema has been challenged in the literature. The aim of this study is to determine whether it is possible to clinically differentiate among these conditions. METHODS: Criteria for MK, CLPU, CLARE, and IK were applied to a data set of 111 contact lens-associated CIEs, spanning a wide range of clinical severities, presenting consecutively to a hospital clinic. A Venn diagram analysis was used to determine the extent to which these conditions can be clinically differentiated. RESULTS: Of the 111 CIEs, 20% could be classified unambiguously as MK, CLPU, CLARE, or IK, 56% could be classified as 1 of 2 conditions, 13% could be classified as 1 of 3 conditions, and 0% could be classified as 1 of 4 conditions. Eleven percent of CIEs could not be classified as any of the 4 conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Although the etiology of CIEs is multifactorial, the considerable overlap between the clinical presentation of MK, CLPU, CLARE, and IK is such that it is not possible to clinically differentiate between them with any degree of certainty. A preferred approach might be to consider CIEs as part of a disease continuum whereby these events can manifest in various degrees of severity, depending as well on the point at which the condition is observed in the course of the natural history of the disease.
PURPOSE: A schema has recently been described for clinical differentiation among 4 symptomatic subtypes of contact lens-associated corneal infiltrative events (CIEs): microbial keratitis (MK), contact lens-induced peripheral ulcer (CLPU), contact lens-induced acute red eye (CLARE), and infiltrative keratitis (IK). The clinical utility of this schema has been challenged in the literature. The aim of this study is to determine whether it is possible to clinically differentiate among these conditions. METHODS: Criteria for MK, CLPU, CLARE, and IK were applied to a data set of 111 contact lens-associated CIEs, spanning a wide range of clinical severities, presenting consecutively to a hospital clinic. A Venn diagram analysis was used to determine the extent to which these conditions can be clinically differentiated. RESULTS: Of the 111 CIEs, 20% could be classified unambiguously as MK, CLPU, CLARE, or IK, 56% could be classified as 1 of 2 conditions, 13% could be classified as 1 of 3 conditions, and 0% could be classified as 1 of 4 conditions. Eleven percent of CIEs could not be classified as any of the 4 conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Although the etiology of CIEs is multifactorial, the considerable overlap between the clinical presentation of MK, CLPU, CLARE, and IK is such that it is not possible to clinically differentiate between them with any degree of certainty. A preferred approach might be to consider CIEs as part of a disease continuum whereby these events can manifest in various degrees of severity, depending as well on the point at which the condition is observed in the course of the natural history of the disease.