Comparison of the Effects of Ophthalmic Solutions on Human Corneal Epithelial Cells Using Fluorescent Dyes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of differently preserved ophthalmic solutions on the viability and barrier function of human corneal epithelial cells (HCEC) using fluorescent dyes. METHODS: HCEC monolayers were exposed to the ophthalmic solutions containing benzalkonium chloride (BAK), edetate disodium, polyquad, stabilized oxychloro complex (Purite), sodium perborate, or sorbic acid for 5 min, 15 min, and 1 h. At 24 h after exposure, the cultures were assessed for metabolic activity using alamarBlue. The enzyme activity, membrane integrity, and apoptosis were evaluated using confocal microscopy. Barrier function was assessed using sodium fluorescein. RESULTS: The metabolic assay showed that the BAK-preserved ophthalmic solutions significantly reduced cell viability after a 5-min exposure compared to the phosphate buffered saline treated control (P<0.05). Using confocal microscopy, the micrographs showed that BAK caused a reduction in the enzyme activity, increased membrane permeability, and decreased the number of viable cells. Ophthalmic solutions with new preservatives had varying time-dependent adverse effects on cell viability, and the preservative-free solution had the least effect on HCEC. Sodium fluorescein permeability showed that HCEC monolayers treated with BAK-preserved solutions were more permeable to sodium fluorescein than those treated by the other ophthalmic solutions (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: BAK-preserved solutions had greater adverse effects on metabolic activity, enzyme activity, membrane integrity, cell viability, and barrier function than the solutions that were not preserved with BAK. Our study suggests that BAK-free especially, preservative-free ophthalmic solutions are safer alternatives to BAK-preserved ones.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".