Deposit Build-Up on Prosthetic Eyes and a Three-Phase Model of Prosthetic Eye Wear

  • Keith R. Pine
  • Brian H. Sloan
  • Robert J. Jacobs


How patients might best care for their anophthalmic socket and maintain their prostheses in optimal condition is based upon an understanding of the anophthalmic socket’s response to prosthetic eye wear. Knowing the nature of tear protein deposits that interface between the prosthesis and the conjunctival lining of the socket is as important a part of this understanding as knowing how the micro-environment of the socket might change during long periods of continuous wear.


Contact Lens Surface Deposit Physiological Homeostasis Prosthesis Removal Conjunctival Inflammation 
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.


  1. 1.
    Pine KR, Sloan B, Jacobs R. Deposit build-up on prosthetic eyes and the implications for conjunctival inflammation and mucoid discharge. Clin Ophthalmol. 2012;6:1–8.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pine KR, Sloan B, Stewart J, Jacobs RJ. The response of the anophthalmic socket to prosthetic eye wear. Clin Exp Optom. 2013. doi: 10.1111/cxo.12004.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heiler DJ, Gambacorta-Hoffman S, Groemminger SF, Jonasse MS. The concentric distribution of protein on patient-worn hydrogel lenses. CLAO J. 1991;17(4):249–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Franklin VJ, Tigue B, Tonge S. Contact lens care: part 4 – contact lens deposit build-up, discoloration and spoilation mechanisms. Optician. 2001;222(580):16–26.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Keith DJ, Christensen MT, Barry JR, Stein JM. Determination of the lysozyme deposit curve in soft contact lenses. Eye Contact Lens. 2003;29(2):79–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McMonnies C, Lowe R. After-care. In: Phillips AJ, Speedwell L, editors. Contact lenses. 5th ed. Edinburgh: Butterworth Heinemann Elsevier; 2007. p. 388–9.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Franklin VJ. Cleaning efficacy of single-purpose surfactant cleaners and multi-purpose solutions. CLAO J. 1997;20(2):63–8.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Leahy CD, Mandell RB, Lin ST. Initial in vivo tear protein deposit build-up on individual hydrogel contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci. 1990;67(7):504–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fowler SA, Allansmith MR. Evolution of soft contact lens coatings. Arch Ophthalmol. 1980;98(1):95–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pine KR, Sloan B, Jacobs RJ. The development of measuring tools for prosthetic eye research. Clin Exp Optom. 2012;96(1):32–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pine KR, Sloan B, Kyu Yeon IH, Swift S, Jacobs RJ. Deposit buildup on prosthetic eye material (in vitro) and its effect on surface wettability. Clinical Ophthalmol. 2013;7: 313–319.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Donald C, Hamilton L, Doughty MJ. A quantitative assessment of the location and width of Marx’s line along the marginal zone of the human eyelid. Optom Vis Sci. 2003;80(8):564–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Korb DR, Greiner JV, Herman JP, et al. Lid-wiper epitheliopathy and dry-eye symptoms in contact lens wearers. CLAO J. 2002;28(4):211–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liotet S, Triclot MP, Perderiset M, Warnet VN, Laroche L. The role of conjunctival mucus in contact lens fitting. CLAO J. 1985;11(2):149–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vasquez RJ, Linberg JV. The anophthalmic socket and the prosthetic eye. A clinical and bacteriologic study. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 1989;5(4):277–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Biology online. Available from: Accessed 27 Jun 2015.
  17. 17.
    Zinni Y. Bacteria homeostasis. eHow. Available from: Accessed 27 Jun 2015.
  18. 18.
    Christensen JN, Fahmy JA. The bacterial flora of the conjunctival anophthalmic socket in glass prosthesis-carriers. Acta Ophthalmol. 1974;52(6):801–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sun MT, Pirbhai A, Selva D, Bacterial bio- films associated with ocular prosthesis. Discipline of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, South Australian Institute of Ophthalmology and Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide. 2013.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Srinivasan BD, Jakobiec FA, Iwamoto T, DeVoe AG. Giant papillary conjunctivitis with ocular prostheses. Arch Ophthalmol. 1979;97(5):892–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bozkurt B, Akyurek N, Irkec M, Erdener U, Memis L. Immunohistochemical findings in prosthesis-associated giant papillary conjunctivitis. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2007;35(6):535–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Donshik PC. Giant papillary conjunctivitis. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 1994;92:687–744.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fowler SA, Korb DR, Finnemore VM, Allansmith MR. Surface deposits on worn hard contact lenses. Arch Ophthalmol. 1984;102(5):757–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jones CA, Collin JR. A classification and review the causes of discharging sockets. Trans Ophthalmol Soc U K. 1983;103(Pt 3):351–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Donshik PC. Extended wear contact lenses. Ophthalmol Clin North Am. 2003;16(3):305–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pine K, Sloan B, Stewart J, Jacobs RJ. A survey of prosthetic eye wearers to investigate mucoid discharge. Clin Ophthalmol. 2012;6:707–13.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pine K, Sloan B, Stewart J, Jacobs RJ. Concerns of anophthalmic patients wearing artificial eyes. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2011;39(1):47–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Keith R. Pine
    • 1
  • Brian H. Sloan
    • 2
  • Robert J. Jacobs
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Optometry and Vision ScienceThe University of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  2. 2.New Zealand National Eye CentreThe University of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations