Optimal methodology for lid wiper epitheliopathy identification

      Abstract

      Purpose

      Lid wiper epitheliopathy (LWE) is a clinical sign that has been associated with dry eye disease. This study used a semi-automated method to identify the effect of drop instillation and post-dye viewing time on the absorption of lissamine green (LG) and sodium fluorescein (NaFl) on the upper eyelid in order to ascertain the optimal identification for LWE assessment.

      Methods

      In 37 participants with LWE, 1-drop of 1% LG (10 μL) was applied to the superior bulbar conjunctiva in the right eye, and photographs of the lid margin were taken 1, 3, and 5 min after instillation. Measurements were repeated in the same eye following instillations of 2-drops of 1% LG. The same procedures were followed for application of 2% NaFl (2 μL) to the left eye. Staining area was determined using software to detect and measure dye-stained images. Analysis used a linear mixed model with fixed effects of time, number of drops and their interaction.

      Results

      For LG, multivariate analysis showed that time of drop instillation was significant (p = 0.0091) as was the area of staining in the 2-drop versus 1-drop condition (p < 0.0001). For NaFl, there was a significant effect of time (p < 0.0001), drops (p < 0.0001), and a time/drops interaction (p < 0.0134), suggesting that both time and number of drops are important.

      Conclusion

      A single drop of dye is insufficient to reveal the full extent of LWE staining. A 2-drop instillation is recommended and observation is recommended between 1 and 5 min (LG) and between 3 and 5 min (NaFl).

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic and Personal
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Contact Lens and Anterior Eye
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Korb D.R.
        • Herman J.P.
        • Greiner J.V.
        • Scaffidi R.C.
        • Finnemore V.M.
        • Exford J.M.
        • et al.
        Lid wiper epitheliopathy and dry eye symptoms.
        Eye Contact Lens. 2005; 31: 2-8https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ICL.0000140910.03095.FA
        • Knop E.
        • Korb D.R.
        • Blackie C.A.
        • Knop N.
        The lid margin is an underestimated structure for preservation of ocular surface health and development of dry eye disease.
        Dev Ophthalmol. 2010; 45: 108-122https://doi.org/10.1159/000315024
        • Nelson J.D.
        • Craig J.P.
        • Akpek E.K.
        • Azar D.T.
        • Belmonte C.
        • Bron A.J.
        • et al.
        TFOS DEWS II introduction.
        Ocul Surf. 2017; 15: 269-275https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JTOS.2017.05.005
        • Korb D.R.
        • Herman J.P.
        • Blackie C.A.
        • Scaffidi R.C.
        • Greiner J.V.
        • Exford J.M.
        • et al.
        Prevalence of lid wiper epitheliopathy in subjects with dry eye signs and symptoms.
        Cornea. 2010; 29: 377-383https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0b013e3181ba0cb2
        • Korb D.R.
        • Greiner J.V.
        • Herman J.P.
        • Hebert E.
        • Finnemore V.M.
        • Exford J.M.
        • et al.
        Lid-wiper epitheliopathy and dry-eye symptoms in contact lens wearers.
        CLAO J. 2002; 28: 211-216https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ICL.0000029344.37847.5A
        • Efron N.
        • Brennan N.A.
        • Morgan P.B.
        • Wilson T.
        Lid wiper epitheliopathy.
        Prog Retin Eye Res. 2016; 53: 140-174https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preteyeres.2016.04.004
        • McMonnies C.W.
        An examination of the relationship between ocular surface tear osmolarity compartments and epitheliopathy.
        Ocul Surf. 2015; 13: 110-117https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtos.2014.07.002
        • Navascues-Cornago M.
        • Maldonado-Codina C.
        • Gupta R.
        • Morgan P.B.
        Characterization of Upper Eyelid Tarsus and lid wiper dimensions.
        Eye Contact Lens. 2016; 42: 289-294https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0000000000000230
        • Kunnen C.M.E.
        • Wolffsohn J.S.
        • Ritchey E.R.
        Comparison of subjective grading of lid wiper epitheliopathy with a semi-objective method.
        Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2018; 41: 28-33https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2017.09.008
        • Kunnen Carolina
        • Percy
        • Lazon De La Lara.
        • Holden Brien A.
        • Papas E.B.
        Automated Assessment of Lid Margin Lissamine Green Staining. 35. C.V. Mosby Co, 2014
        • Tseng S.C.
        Evaluation of the ocular surface in dry-eye conditions.
        Int Ophthalmol Clin. 1994; 34: 57-69
        • Doughty M.J.
        Rose bengal staining as an assessment of ocular surface damage and recovery in dry eye disease—a review.
        Contact Lens Anterior Eye. 2013; 36: 272-280https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2013.07.008
        • Begley C.
        • Caffery B.
        • Chalmers R.
        • Situ P.
        • Simpson T.
        • Nelson J.D.
        Review and analysis of grading scales for ocular surface staining.
        Ocul Surf. 2019; 17: 208-220https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtos.2019.01.004
        • Korb D.R.
        • Herman J.P.
        • Finnemore V.M.
        • Exford J.M.
        • Blackie C.A.
        An evaluation of the efficacy of fluorescein, rose bengal, lissamine green, and a new dye mixture for ocular surface staining.
        Eye Contact Lens. 2008; 34: 61-64https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0b013e31811ead93
        • Pult H.
        • Purslow C.
        • Berry M.
        • Murphy P.J.
        Clinical tests for successful contact lens wear: relationship and predictive potential.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2008; 85: E924-9https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181888909
        • Pult H.
        • Purslow C.
        • Murphy P.J.
        The relationship between clinical signs and dry eye symptoms.
        Eye. 2011; 25: 502-510https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2010.228
        • Varikooty J.
        • Lay B.
        • Jones L.
        Optimization of assessment and grading for lid wiper epitheliopathy.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2012; : 88
        • Best N.
        • Drury L.
        • Wolffsohn J.S.
        Predicting success with silicone-hydrogel contact lenses in new wearers.
        Contact Lens Anterior Eye. 2013; 36: 232-237https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2013.02.013
        • Shiraishi A.
        • Yamaguchi M.
        • Ohashi Y.
        Prevalence of upper- and lower-lid-wiper epitheliopathy in contact lens wearers and non-wearers.
        Eye Contact Lens. 2014; 40: 220-224https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0000000000000040
        • Guthrie S.E.
        • Jones L.
        • Blackie C.A.
        • Korb D.R.
        A comparative study between an oil-in-water emulsion and nonlipid eye drops used for rewetting contact lenses.
        Eye Contact Lens. 2015; 41: 373-377https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0000000000000138
        • Jalbert I.
        • Madigan M.C.
        • Shao M.
        • Ng J.
        • Cheng J.
        • Wong D.
        • et al.
        Assessing the human lid margin epithelium using impression cytology.
        Acta Ophthalmol. 2012; 90: e547-52https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-3768.2012.02482.x
        • Navascues-Cornago M.
        • Morgan P.B.
        • Maldonado-Codina C.
        Lid margin sensitivity and staining in contact Lens Wear versus No Lens Wear.
        Cornea. 2015; 34: 808-816https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0000000000000448
        • Satjawatcharaphong P.
        • Ge S.
        • Lin M.C.
        Clinical outcomes associated with thermal pulsation system treatment.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2015; 92: e334-41https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000000670
        • Varikooty J.
        • Srinivasan S.
        • Subbaraman L.
        • Woods C.A.
        • Fonn D.
        • Simpson T.L.J.L.
        Variations in observable lid wiper epitheliopathy (LWE) staining patterns in wearers of silicone hydrogel lenses.
        Contact Lens Anterior Eye. 2015; 38: 471-476
        • Varikooty J.
        • Srinivasan S.
        • Jones L.
        Atypical manifestation of upper lid margin staining in silicone hydrogel lens wearers with symptoms of dry eye.
        Contact Lens Anterior Eye. 2008; 31: 44-46https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2007.07.001
        • Bron A.J.
        • Argüeso P.
        • Irkec M.
        • Bright F.V.
        Clinical staining of the ocular surface: mechanisms and interpretations.
        Prog Retin Eye Res. 2015; 44: 36-61https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preteyeres.2014.10.001
        • Wolffsohn J.S.
        • Arita R.
        • Chalmers R.
        • Djalilian A.
        • Dogru M.
        • Dumbleton K.
        • et al.
        TFOS DEWS II diagnostic methodology report.
        Ocul Surf. 2017; 15: 539-574https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtos.2017.05.001
        • Hamrah P.
        • Alipour F.
        • Jiang S.
        • Sohn J.-H.
        • Foulks G.N.
        Optimizing evaluation of Lissamine Green parameters for ocular surface staining.
        Eye. 2011; 25: 1429-1434https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2011.184
        • Akaike H.
        Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle.
        in: Petrov B.N.F.C.F. Proc. 2nd int. symp. inf. theory. 1998: 199-213https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-1694-0_15 (Budapest)
        • Schwarz G.
        Estimating the dimension of a model.
        Ann Stat. 1978; 6: 461-464https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176344136
        • Wolffsohn J.S.
        • Naroo S.A.
        • Christie C.
        • Morris J.
        • Conway R.
        • Maldonado-Codina C.
        • et al.
        Anterior eye health recording.
        Contact Lens Anterior Eye. 2015; 38: 266-271https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2015.03.001
        • Li W.
        • Yeh T.N.
        • Leung T.
        • Yuen T.
        • Lerma M.
        • Lin M.C.
        The relationship of lid wiper epitheliopathy to ocular surface signs and symptoms.
        Investig Opthalmology Vis Sci. 2018; 59: 1878https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.17-23639
        • Markoulli M.
        • Isa N.A.P.E.
        Temporal characteristics of sodium fluorescein in the tear Meniscus.
        Optom Vis Sci. 2017; 94: 166-173
        • Muntz A.
        • Subbaraman L.N.
        • Craig J.P.
        • Jones L.
        Cytomorphological assessment of the lid margin in relation to symptoms, contact lens wear and lid wiper epitheliopathy.
        Ocul Surf. 2020; 18: 214-220https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtos.2019.12.001
        • Delaveris A.
        • Stahl U.
        • Madigan M.
        • Jalbert I.
        Comparative performance of lissamine green stains.
        Contact Lens Anterior Eye. 2018; 41: 23-27https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2017.11.002
        • Foulks G.N.
        Challenges and pitfalls in clinical trials of treatments for dry eye.
        Ocul Surf. 2003; 1: 20-30
        • Siddireddy J.S.
        • Vijay A.K.
        • Tan J.
        • Willcox M.
        The eyelids and tear film in contact lens discomfort.
        Contact Lens Anterior Eye. 2018; 41: 144-153https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2017.10.004
        • Shiraishi A.
        • Yamaguchi M.
        • Ohashi Y.
        Prevalence of upper- and lower-lid-wiper epitheliopathy in contact lens wearers and non-wearers.
        Eye Contact Lens. 2014; 40: 220-224https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0000000000000040
        • Shaw A.
        • Collins M.
        • Huang J.
        • Nguyen HMP Kim Z.
        • Lee G.
        • et al.
        Lid wiper epitheliopathy: the influence of multiple lid eversions and exposure time.
        Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2019; 42: 304-310https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2018.09.003