Transmittance Properties of Contact Lens Multipurpose Solutions and Their Effects on a Hydrogel Lens
Kelechi C. Ogbuehi
Corneal Research Chair, Department of Optometry and Vision Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, PO box 10219 Riyadh 11433, Saudi Arabia.
Faisal M. J. Khan
Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Ferrara, Italy.
Saud A. Alanazi
Corneal Research Chair, Department of Optometry and Vision Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, PO box 10219 Riyadh 11433, Saudi Arabia.
Turki M. AlMubrad
Corneal Research Chair, Department of Optometry and Vision Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, PO box 10219 Riyadh 11433, Saudi Arabia.
Uchechukwu L. Osuagwu *
Faculty of Health, Visual and Ophthalmic Optics Group (Chronic Disease and Ageing Domain), Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, School of Optometry and Vision Sciences, Q Block, Kelvin Grove, Brisbane Queensland 4059, Australia.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Purpose: The aim was to assess the compatibility of different multipurpose solutions (MPSs) with one type of silicone hydrogel (SiH) contact lens by, assessing the changes in both ultraviolet (UV) and visible light transmissibility of the hydrogel lens caused by the MPSs.
Methods: The light transmittance from 200-700 nm were measured for the lotrafilcon B blister pack solution (BPS), six MPSs namely, ReNuMultiPlus Multi-Purpose Solution (Bausch and Lomb Inc., Rochester NY, USA.); Complete RevitaLens Multi-Purpose (Abbott Medical Optics Inc., Quarryvale Co. Dublin, Ireland); All In One Light (Sauflon Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Twickenham, England); SOLO-care AQUA™ (Ciba Vision Corporation Duluth, Georgia, USA.); Biomedics All-in-one solution (CooperVision, Hamble, UK); and HippiaMultiPlus All-in-one solution (Interojo Inc., Kyeonggi-do, Korea), and a lotrafilcon B SiH lens (before and after storage), using a spectrophotometer.
Results: The UV transmitted through the BPS and the MPS were similar (p >.05, for all), except for the HippiaMultiPlus which was lower (p < 0.001) by 19.8%. Mean transparency values were statistically (p<.001) significantly different between the BPS and the MPSs. All MP solution/SiH lens combinations resulted in relatively high UV transmittance values especially in the UVC spectrum, and significantly increased (p <.001) the visible light transmittance values of the SiH lens. Greater changes in transparency were observed in the ReNu/SiH lens (28.5%) and the Complete RevitaLens/SiH lens (24.9%) combinations.
Conclusion: The six MPSs showed significant variations in the transmitted UV and visible light. Similar to the BPS, all MPSs were equally transparent, but showed very poor UVA & UVB attenuation, except for the Hippia MultiPlus. The MPS/SiH lens combinations did not significantly affect the lens transparency but it significant increased the lens transmittance of UV radiation, after storage. Further in-vivo studies are needed to validate if this effect is constant.
Keywords: Contact lens, Multipurpose Solution (MPS), Blister Pack Solution (BPS), ultraviolet, light transmission, electromagnetic spectrum.