Comparison of conjunctival staining between lissamine green and yellow filtered fluorescein sodium

Abstract Objective To compare conjunctival staining between lissamine green and fluorescein sodium using a yellow barrier filter. Design Retrospective cross-sectional study. Participants Thirteen eyes of 13 patients with dry eyes. Methods All patients underwent ocular surface staining with fluoresce...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Canadian journal of ophthalmology 2015-08, Vol.50 (4), p.273-277
Hauptverfasser: Eom, Youngsub, MD, Lee, Jong-Suk, MD, Keun Lee, Hyung, MD, PhD, Myung Kim, Hyo, MD, PhD, Suk Song, Jong, MD, PhD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 277
container_issue 4
container_start_page 273
container_title Canadian journal of ophthalmology
container_volume 50
creator Eom, Youngsub, MD
Lee, Jong-Suk, MD
Keun Lee, Hyung, MD, PhD
Myung Kim, Hyo, MD, PhD
Suk Song, Jong, MD, PhD
description Abstract Objective To compare conjunctival staining between lissamine green and fluorescein sodium using a yellow barrier filter. Design Retrospective cross-sectional study. Participants Thirteen eyes of 13 patients with dry eyes. Methods All patients underwent ocular surface staining with fluorescein sodium and lissamine green. Ocular surface staining with fluorescein sodium was observed through slit-lamp examination under cobalt blue illumination and a yellow filter. Temporal (0–5) and nasal (0–5) conjunctival staining grade was separately graded according to the Oxford scheme. The contrast score was defined as the absolute difference between mean grey values of punctate staining and background. Conjunctival staining grade and contrast scores were compared between these 2 staining methods. Results The sum of the conjunctival staining grade (0–10) for the nasal and temporal conjunctiva was 4.7 ± 2.5 for fluorescein sodium, which was significantly higher than that of lissamine green, 4.1 ± 2.5 ( p = 0.005). The contrast score of temporal and nasal conjunctival staining was 34.6 ± 12.0 and 34.7 ± 10.3, respectively, for fluorescein sodium, which was also significantly greater than for lissamine green (23.4 ± 8.1 and 21.0 ± 9.0, respectively; p = 0.003 and p = 0.003, respectively). Conclusions Conjunctival staining with fluorescein sodium and a yellow filter seems to be more sensitive for the detection of conjunctival damage than lissamine green. Fluorescein staining with the yellow filter has the advantage of simultaneous observation of both corneal and conjunctival damage in patients with dry eye without the need for additional vital staining.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jcjo.2015.05.007
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1703237549</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0008418215002264</els_id><sourcerecordid>1703237549</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-cf5d923f92ebdf6ee4c5fd2b6611490c2da2887a8bb052cb1e628efc95a605bf3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kcGL1TAQxoMou891_wEPkqOXPidpk7YggjzcVVjwoJ5DmkyW1DR5Ju0u77-35a0ePAgDw8D3fcz8hpDXDPYMmHw37kczpj0HJvawFrTPyI61TFR1LeE52QFAVzWs45fkZSkjQF23jbwgl1xy0XIOOzIc0nTU2ZcUaXLUpDgu0cz-QQdaZu2jj_d0wPkRMdLgS9GTj0jv8zbraOkJQ0iP1PkwY0ZLXVhSxmLQR1qS9cv0irxwOhS8fupX5MfNp--Hz9Xd19svh493lWkYmyvjhO157XqOg3USsTHCWT5IyVjTg-FW865rdTcMILgZGEreoTO90BLE4Oor8vace8zp14JlVpNf9whBR0xLUayFmtetaPpVys9Sk1MpGZ06Zj_pfFIM1MZWjWpjqza2CtaCdjW9ecpfhgntX8sfmKvg_VmA65UPHrMqxmM0aH1GMyub_P_zP_xjN2Hlb3T4iScsY1pyXPkppgpXoL5t392eywQA57KpfwOvCKH4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1703237549</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of conjunctival staining between lissamine green and yellow filtered fluorescein sodium</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Eom, Youngsub, MD ; Lee, Jong-Suk, MD ; Keun Lee, Hyung, MD, PhD ; Myung Kim, Hyo, MD, PhD ; Suk Song, Jong, MD, PhD</creator><creatorcontrib>Eom, Youngsub, MD ; Lee, Jong-Suk, MD ; Keun Lee, Hyung, MD, PhD ; Myung Kim, Hyo, MD, PhD ; Suk Song, Jong, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Objective To compare conjunctival staining between lissamine green and fluorescein sodium using a yellow barrier filter. Design Retrospective cross-sectional study. Participants Thirteen eyes of 13 patients with dry eyes. Methods All patients underwent ocular surface staining with fluorescein sodium and lissamine green. Ocular surface staining with fluorescein sodium was observed through slit-lamp examination under cobalt blue illumination and a yellow filter. Temporal (0–5) and nasal (0–5) conjunctival staining grade was separately graded according to the Oxford scheme. The contrast score was defined as the absolute difference between mean grey values of punctate staining and background. Conjunctival staining grade and contrast scores were compared between these 2 staining methods. Results The sum of the conjunctival staining grade (0–10) for the nasal and temporal conjunctiva was 4.7 ± 2.5 for fluorescein sodium, which was significantly higher than that of lissamine green, 4.1 ± 2.5 ( p = 0.005). The contrast score of temporal and nasal conjunctival staining was 34.6 ± 12.0 and 34.7 ± 10.3, respectively, for fluorescein sodium, which was also significantly greater than for lissamine green (23.4 ± 8.1 and 21.0 ± 9.0, respectively; p = 0.003 and p = 0.003, respectively). Conclusions Conjunctival staining with fluorescein sodium and a yellow filter seems to be more sensitive for the detection of conjunctival damage than lissamine green. Fluorescein staining with the yellow filter has the advantage of simultaneous observation of both corneal and conjunctival damage in patients with dry eye without the need for additional vital staining.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0008-4182</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1715-3360</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jcjo.2015.05.007</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26257220</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Coloring Agents - administration &amp; dosage ; Coloring Agents - chemistry ; Conjunctiva - pathology ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Dry Eye Syndromes - diagnosis ; Female ; Fluorescein - administration &amp; dosage ; Fluorescein - chemistry ; Fluorescent Dyes - administration &amp; dosage ; Fluorescent Dyes - chemistry ; Humans ; Internal Medicine ; Lissamine Green Dyes - administration &amp; dosage ; Lissamine Green Dyes - chemistry ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Ophthalmology ; Retrospective Studies ; Staining and Labeling - methods ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Canadian journal of ophthalmology, 2015-08, Vol.50 (4), p.273-277</ispartof><rights>Canadian Ophthalmological Society</rights><rights>2015 Canadian Ophthalmological Society</rights><rights>Copyright © 2015 Canadian Ophthalmological Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-cf5d923f92ebdf6ee4c5fd2b6611490c2da2887a8bb052cb1e628efc95a605bf3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-cf5d923f92ebdf6ee4c5fd2b6611490c2da2887a8bb052cb1e628efc95a605bf3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9475-4409</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjo.2015.05.007$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26257220$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Eom, Youngsub, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Jong-Suk, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Keun Lee, Hyung, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Myung Kim, Hyo, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suk Song, Jong, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of conjunctival staining between lissamine green and yellow filtered fluorescein sodium</title><title>Canadian journal of ophthalmology</title><addtitle>Can J Ophthalmol</addtitle><description>Abstract Objective To compare conjunctival staining between lissamine green and fluorescein sodium using a yellow barrier filter. Design Retrospective cross-sectional study. Participants Thirteen eyes of 13 patients with dry eyes. Methods All patients underwent ocular surface staining with fluorescein sodium and lissamine green. Ocular surface staining with fluorescein sodium was observed through slit-lamp examination under cobalt blue illumination and a yellow filter. Temporal (0–5) and nasal (0–5) conjunctival staining grade was separately graded according to the Oxford scheme. The contrast score was defined as the absolute difference between mean grey values of punctate staining and background. Conjunctival staining grade and contrast scores were compared between these 2 staining methods. Results The sum of the conjunctival staining grade (0–10) for the nasal and temporal conjunctiva was 4.7 ± 2.5 for fluorescein sodium, which was significantly higher than that of lissamine green, 4.1 ± 2.5 ( p = 0.005). The contrast score of temporal and nasal conjunctival staining was 34.6 ± 12.0 and 34.7 ± 10.3, respectively, for fluorescein sodium, which was also significantly greater than for lissamine green (23.4 ± 8.1 and 21.0 ± 9.0, respectively; p = 0.003 and p = 0.003, respectively). Conclusions Conjunctival staining with fluorescein sodium and a yellow filter seems to be more sensitive for the detection of conjunctival damage than lissamine green. Fluorescein staining with the yellow filter has the advantage of simultaneous observation of both corneal and conjunctival damage in patients with dry eye without the need for additional vital staining.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Coloring Agents - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Coloring Agents - chemistry</subject><subject>Conjunctiva - pathology</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Dry Eye Syndromes - diagnosis</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fluorescein - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Fluorescein - chemistry</subject><subject>Fluorescent Dyes - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Fluorescent Dyes - chemistry</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Lissamine Green Dyes - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Lissamine Green Dyes - chemistry</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Ophthalmology</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Staining and Labeling - methods</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0008-4182</issn><issn>1715-3360</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kcGL1TAQxoMou891_wEPkqOXPidpk7YggjzcVVjwoJ5DmkyW1DR5Ju0u77-35a0ePAgDw8D3fcz8hpDXDPYMmHw37kczpj0HJvawFrTPyI61TFR1LeE52QFAVzWs45fkZSkjQF23jbwgl1xy0XIOOzIc0nTU2ZcUaXLUpDgu0cz-QQdaZu2jj_d0wPkRMdLgS9GTj0jv8zbraOkJQ0iP1PkwY0ZLXVhSxmLQR1qS9cv0irxwOhS8fupX5MfNp--Hz9Xd19svh493lWkYmyvjhO157XqOg3USsTHCWT5IyVjTg-FW865rdTcMILgZGEreoTO90BLE4Oor8vace8zp14JlVpNf9whBR0xLUayFmtetaPpVys9Sk1MpGZ06Zj_pfFIM1MZWjWpjqza2CtaCdjW9ecpfhgntX8sfmKvg_VmA65UPHrMqxmM0aH1GMyub_P_zP_xjN2Hlb3T4iScsY1pyXPkppgpXoL5t392eywQA57KpfwOvCKH4</recordid><startdate>20150801</startdate><enddate>20150801</enddate><creator>Eom, Youngsub, MD</creator><creator>Lee, Jong-Suk, MD</creator><creator>Keun Lee, Hyung, MD, PhD</creator><creator>Myung Kim, Hyo, MD, PhD</creator><creator>Suk Song, Jong, MD, PhD</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9475-4409</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20150801</creationdate><title>Comparison of conjunctival staining between lissamine green and yellow filtered fluorescein sodium</title><author>Eom, Youngsub, MD ; Lee, Jong-Suk, MD ; Keun Lee, Hyung, MD, PhD ; Myung Kim, Hyo, MD, PhD ; Suk Song, Jong, MD, PhD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-cf5d923f92ebdf6ee4c5fd2b6611490c2da2887a8bb052cb1e628efc95a605bf3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Coloring Agents - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Coloring Agents - chemistry</topic><topic>Conjunctiva - pathology</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Dry Eye Syndromes - diagnosis</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fluorescein - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Fluorescein - chemistry</topic><topic>Fluorescent Dyes - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Fluorescent Dyes - chemistry</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Lissamine Green Dyes - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Lissamine Green Dyes - chemistry</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Ophthalmology</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Staining and Labeling - methods</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Eom, Youngsub, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Jong-Suk, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Keun Lee, Hyung, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Myung Kim, Hyo, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suk Song, Jong, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Canadian journal of ophthalmology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Eom, Youngsub, MD</au><au>Lee, Jong-Suk, MD</au><au>Keun Lee, Hyung, MD, PhD</au><au>Myung Kim, Hyo, MD, PhD</au><au>Suk Song, Jong, MD, PhD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of conjunctival staining between lissamine green and yellow filtered fluorescein sodium</atitle><jtitle>Canadian journal of ophthalmology</jtitle><addtitle>Can J Ophthalmol</addtitle><date>2015-08-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>50</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>273</spage><epage>277</epage><pages>273-277</pages><issn>0008-4182</issn><eissn>1715-3360</eissn><abstract>Abstract Objective To compare conjunctival staining between lissamine green and fluorescein sodium using a yellow barrier filter. Design Retrospective cross-sectional study. Participants Thirteen eyes of 13 patients with dry eyes. Methods All patients underwent ocular surface staining with fluorescein sodium and lissamine green. Ocular surface staining with fluorescein sodium was observed through slit-lamp examination under cobalt blue illumination and a yellow filter. Temporal (0–5) and nasal (0–5) conjunctival staining grade was separately graded according to the Oxford scheme. The contrast score was defined as the absolute difference between mean grey values of punctate staining and background. Conjunctival staining grade and contrast scores were compared between these 2 staining methods. Results The sum of the conjunctival staining grade (0–10) for the nasal and temporal conjunctiva was 4.7 ± 2.5 for fluorescein sodium, which was significantly higher than that of lissamine green, 4.1 ± 2.5 ( p = 0.005). The contrast score of temporal and nasal conjunctival staining was 34.6 ± 12.0 and 34.7 ± 10.3, respectively, for fluorescein sodium, which was also significantly greater than for lissamine green (23.4 ± 8.1 and 21.0 ± 9.0, respectively; p = 0.003 and p = 0.003, respectively). Conclusions Conjunctival staining with fluorescein sodium and a yellow filter seems to be more sensitive for the detection of conjunctival damage than lissamine green. Fluorescein staining with the yellow filter has the advantage of simultaneous observation of both corneal and conjunctival damage in patients with dry eye without the need for additional vital staining.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>26257220</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jcjo.2015.05.007</doi><tpages>5</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9475-4409</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0008-4182
ispartof Canadian journal of ophthalmology, 2015-08, Vol.50 (4), p.273-277
issn 0008-4182
1715-3360
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1703237549
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Adult
Coloring Agents - administration & dosage
Coloring Agents - chemistry
Conjunctiva - pathology
Cross-Sectional Studies
Dry Eye Syndromes - diagnosis
Female
Fluorescein - administration & dosage
Fluorescein - chemistry
Fluorescent Dyes - administration & dosage
Fluorescent Dyes - chemistry
Humans
Internal Medicine
Lissamine Green Dyes - administration & dosage
Lissamine Green Dyes - chemistry
Male
Middle Aged
Ophthalmology
Retrospective Studies
Staining and Labeling - methods
Young Adult
title Comparison of conjunctival staining between lissamine green and yellow filtered fluorescein sodium
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T12%3A45%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20conjunctival%20staining%20between%20lissamine%20green%20and%20yellow%20filtered%20fluorescein%20sodium&rft.jtitle=Canadian%20journal%20of%20ophthalmology&rft.au=Eom,%20Youngsub,%20MD&rft.date=2015-08-01&rft.volume=50&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=273&rft.epage=277&rft.pages=273-277&rft.issn=0008-4182&rft.eissn=1715-3360&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jcjo.2015.05.007&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1703237549%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1703237549&rft_id=info:pmid/26257220&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S0008418215002264&rfr_iscdi=true