Advertisement

The Eye and Its Artificial Replacement

  • Subrata Pal
Chapter

Abstract

The human eye is a marvelous organ that is complex in function. Due to diseases, trauma, and the natural aging process, vision is impaired and reduced to a great extent. Medical scientists, working in tandem with material scientists, have developed many operative techniques and devices for correcting vision and giving relief to patients. To understand these developments, we need to start with the anatomy of the eye.

Keywords

Contact Lens Cataract Surgery Intraocular Lens Ciliary Muscle Microbial Keratitis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Study List

  1. 1.
    Barr J (2005) 2004 Annual Report. Contact Lens Spectrum. January 2005Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sokol JL, Mier MG, Bloom S, Asbell PA (1990) A study of patient compliance in a contact lens-wearing population. CLAO J 16(3):209–213Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pearson RM, Efron N (1989) Hundredth anniversary of August Müller’s inaugural dissertation on contact lenses. Surv Ophthalmol 34(2):133–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mandell RB (1988) Contact lens practice, 4th edn. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, ILGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    U.S. Patent No. 2,510,438, filed February 28, 1948Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    The corneal lens. The Optician, September 2, 1949, pp. 141–144.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Corneal contact lenses. The Optician. September 9, 1949, p. 185.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    New contact lens fits pupil only. The New York Times, February 11, 1952, p. 27.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wichterle O, Lim D (1960) Hydrophilic gels for biological use. Nature 185:117–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Looking at silicone hydrogels across generations. Optometric Management. http://www.optometric.com/article.aspx?article=101727. Accessed April 5, 2009.
  11. 11.
    Hartenbaum NP, Stack CM (1997) Color vision deficiency and the X-Chrom lens. Occup Health Saf 66(9):36–40Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Swarbrick HA, Nguyen P, Nguyen T, Pham P (1981) The X-Chrom lens. On seeing red. Surv Ophthalmol 25(5):312–324, PMID 6971497Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Swarbrick HA, Nguyen P, Nguyen T, Pham P (2001) The ChromaGen contact lens system: color vision test results and subjective responses. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 21(3):182–196, PMID 11396392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Harris D (1997) Colouring sight: a study of CL fittings with colour enhancing lenses. Optician 8 June 1997Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Harris DA, MacRow-Hill SJ (1999) Application of ChromaGen haploscopic lenses to patients with dyslexia: a double masked placebo controlled trial. J Am Optom Assoc 70:629–640Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Morgan PB et al. (2005) International contact lens prescribing in 2004: an analysis of more than 17,000 contact lens fits from 14 countries in 2004 reveals the diversity of contact lens practice worldwide. Cont Lens Spectrum. January 2005Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    EyeMDLink.comGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    “45 Coverage Issues—Supplies—Drugs 11–91 45” (PDF). Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. http://new.cms.hhs.gov/manuals/downloads/Pub06_PART_45.pdf. Accessed 01 Mar 2006
  19. 19.
    FDA Premarket Notification for “new silicone hydrogel lens for daily wear.” July 2008Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cassin B, Solomon S (1990) Dictionary of eye terminology. Triad Publishing Company, Gainesville, FLGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stamler J (2004) Contact lens complications. eMedicine.com. September 1, 2004Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Efron N (2007) Contact lens-induced changes in the anterior eye as observed in vivo with the confocal microscope. Prog Retin Eye Res 26(4):398–436. doi: 10.1016/j.preteyeres.2007.03.003, http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1350-9462(07)00025-0 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Liu Z, Pflugfelder SC (2000) The effects of long-term contact lens wear on corneal thickness, curvature, and surface regularity. Ophthalmology 107(1):105–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hollingsworth JG, Efron N (2004) Confocal microscopy of the corneas of long-term rigid contact lens wearers. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 27(2):57–64Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhivov A, Stave J, Vollmar B, Guthoff R (2007) In vivo confocal microscopic evaluation of langerhans cell density and distribution in the corneal epithelium of healthy volunteers and contact lens wearers. Cornea 26(1):47–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Andrasko G, Ryen K (2007) A series of evaluations of MPS and silicone hydrogel lens combinations. Rev Cornea Cont Lens, 36–42.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Robertson DM, Petroll WM, Jester JV, Cavanagh HD (2007) Current concepts: contact lens related Pseudomonas keratitis. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 30:94–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sharma S, Kunimoto D, Rao TN, Garg P, Rao GN (1999) Trends in antibiotic resistance of corneal pathogens: Part II. An analysis of leading bacterial keratitis isolates. Ind J Opthalmol 47:101–109Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Verhelst D, Koppen C, Looveren JV, Meheus A, Tassignon M (2005) Clinical, epidemiological and cost aspects of contact lens related infectious keratitis in Belgium: results of a seven-year retrospective study. Bull Soc Belge Ophtalmol 297:7–15Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Burd EM, Ogawa GSH, Hyndiuk RA (1994) Bacterial keratitis and conjunctivitis. In: Smolin G, Thoft RA (eds) The cornea. Scientific foundations and clinical practice, 3rd edn. Little, Brown & Co, Boston, pp 115–167Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zaidi T, Mowrey-McKee M, Pier GB (2004) Hypoxia increases corneal cell expression of CFTR leading to increased Pseudomonas aeruginosa binding, internalization, and initiation of inflammation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 45:4066–4074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sweeney DF, Keay L, Jalbert I (2000) Clinical performance of silicone hydrogel lenses. In: Sweeney DF (ed) Silicone hydrogels: the rebirth of continuous wear contact lenses. Butterworth Heinemann, Woburn, MAGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kodjikian L, Casoli-Bergeron E, Malet F, Janin-Manificat H, Freney J, Burillon C, Colin J, Steghens JP (2008) Bacterial adhesion to conventional hydrogel and new silicone hydrogel contact lens materials. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 246:267–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yung MS, Boost M, Cho P, Yap M (2007) Microbial contamination of contact lenses and lens care accessories of soft contact lens wearers (university students) in Hong Kong. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 27(1):11–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Midelfart J, Midelfart A, Bevanger L (1996) Microbial contamination of contact lens cases among medical students. CLAO J 22(1):21–24Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gray TB, Cursons RT, Sherwan JF, Rose PR (1995) Acanthamoeba, bacterial, and fungal contamination of contact lens storage cases. Br J Ophthalmol 79:601–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Amos CF, George MD (2006) Clinical and laboratory testing of a silver-impregnated lens case. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 29:247–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mathews SM, Spallholz JE, Grimson MJ, Dubielzig RR, Gray T, Reid TW (2006) Prevention of bacterial colonization of contact lenses with covalently attached selenium and effects on the rabbit cornea. Cornea 25:806–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Santos L, Rodrigues D, Lira M, Oliveira R, Real Oliveira ME, Vilar EY, Azeredo J (2007) The effect of octylglucoside and sodium cholate in Staphylococcus epidermidis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa adhesion to soft contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci 84:429–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Slade S (2005) Accommodating IOLs: design, technique, results. Rev Ophthalmol. 20 Mar 2009. <http://www.revophth.com/index.asp?page=1_751.htm>
  41. 41.
    USA Eyes (2008) Crystalens accommodating IOL. Council of Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance. 20 March 2009. http://www.usaeyes.org/lasik/faq/crystalens-2.htm>
  42. 42.
    Liz S (2009) Intraocular lenses (IOLs): new advances including AcrySof ReStor, Tecnis, ReZoom, and Crystalens. All about vision. Access Media Group LLCGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    United States Food and Drug Administration. Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) (2004) Crystalens Model AT-45 Accommodating IOL P030002. New Device Approval. CDRH Consumer Information. Updated Jan 21 2004. http://web.archive.org/http://fda.gov/cdrh/mda/docs/p030002.htmlGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Cummings JS et al (2006) Clinical evaluation of the Crystalens AT-45 accommodating interocular lens results of the US Food and Drug Administration clinical trial. J Cataract Refract Surg 32(5):812–825MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Pepose JS, Qazi MA, Davies J, Doane JF, Loden JC, Sivalingham V, Mahmoud AM (2007) Visual performance of patients with bilateral vs combination Crystalens, ReZoom, and ReSTOR intraocular lens implants. Am J Ophthamol 144(3):347–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Macsai MS et al (2006) Visual outcomes after accommodating intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg 32(4):628–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sanders DR, Sanders ML (2007) Visual performance results after Tetraflex accommodating intraocular lens implantation. Ophthalmology 114:1679–1684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Subrata Pal
    • 1
  1. 1.Biomedical EngineeringJadavpur UniversityKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations