IOVS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

(Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science. 2004;45:3161-3164.)
© 2004 by The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
DOI:  10.1167/iovs.03-1242
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hume, E. B. H.
Right arrow Articles by Willcox, M. D. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hume, E. B. H.
Right arrow Articles by Willcox, M. D. P.

Secretory Phospholipase A2 Deposition on Contact Lenses and Its Effect on Bacterial Adhesion

Emma B. H. Hume, Nerida Cole, Alpesh Parmar, Maxine E. Tan, Yulina Aliwarga, Tracey Schubert, Brien A. Holden, and Mark D. P. Willcox

From the Vision Cooperative Research Centre, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
PURPOSE. Secretory phospholipase A2 (sPLA2) is a potent antibacterial enzyme in tears and has been found to kill Staphylococcus aureus rapidly in vitro. The purpose was to determine whether sPLA2 deposition is associated with contact lens (CL) type, if sPLA2 remains active on CLs, and if this has an effect on bacterial adhesion.

METHODS. Ionic (etafilcon A) and nonionic (Polymacon) high-water, soft CLs were used. CLs were worn for 6 hours (daily wear, n = 39) or 6 nights on an extended-wear schedule (n = 25). Tears were collected from patients and worn contact lenses were removed and protein and active enzymes extracted for estimation of their levels. The number of S. aureus adhering to sPLA2-soaked CLs in vitro was also quantified.

RESULTS. There was no significant difference in the concentration of sPLA2 in tears between groups of daily CL wearers. Significantly less sPLA2 was recovered from Polymacon CLs for both daily and extended wear compared with etafilcon A CLs (daily wear: 3 vs. 5 ng/lens; extended wear: 3 vs. 6 ng/lens; P < 0.05). sPLA2 activity correlated with protein amounts from lenses. Relatively less active sPLA2 was recovered from Polymacon contact lenses. sPLA2 reduced adhesion of Staphylococcus to contact lenses in vitro.

CONCLUSIONS. Etafilcon A CLs absorb more active sPLA2 than Polymacon CLs, which increases with length of CL wear. The sequestering of sPLA2 onto CLs did not affect amounts of the enzyme in tears. sPLA2 adsorbed to a CL can reduce the viable Staphylococcus adhering to the CL, which may protect the eye from colonization by this pathogen.

The leading cause of microbial keratitis in non–contact-lens wearers and the most commonly isolated Gram-positive bacteria from contact-lens–related infections is Staphylococcus.1 Staphylococcus aureus has been associated with contact-lens–induced peripheral ulceration.2 The first line of defense against these conditions is the nonspecific antibacterial properties of tears. There are many tear components with antibacterial properties, including lysozyme,3 4 lactoferrin,3 4 lipocalin,5 6 7 vitronectin,8 immunoglobulins,3 4 9 10 and complement.11

Secretory phospholipase A2 (sPLA2) has been found to be present in both rabbit12 and human tears.13 14 15 16 17 Cells in the main and accessory lacrimal glands secrete this enzyme.14 sPLA2 cleaves fatty acids from phospholipids at the sn-2 position. With Gram-positive bacteria, membrane damage is due to the cleavage of fatty acids from phospholipids and the large number of cationic residues on the surface of the enzyme.18 This enzyme is extremely active against S. aureus in vitro19 20 21 and is currently thought to be the most potent antistaphylococcal factor in tears.17 The anti-staphylococcal activity of sPLA2 is enhanced in the presence of agents that permeabilize the bacterial cell wall, such as lysostaphin.22 In addition, sPLA2 has shown activity against the Gram-negative bacteria Escherichia coli and Listeria monocytogenes.23 The Gram-negative antibacterial activity of sPLA2 is increased in the presence of bactericidal/permeability-increasing protein.24 Apart from its antibacterial function, sPLA2 is proinflammatory and acts on a range of cells. sPLA2 activates arachidonic acid metabolism and induces cyclooxygenase-2, leading to the release of prostaglandins and leukotrienes.25 sPLA2 is also responsible for cytokine production, such as IL-6 and TNF-{alpha}.26 Intolerant contact lens wearers have been found to have elevated concentrations of this enzyme in their tears.27

The presence of a contact lens in the tear film may change the dynamics and structure of the tear film. Findings regarding tear proteins and their alteration by contact lens wear are varied. Lysozyme, albumin, and lactoferrin have been found to remain unchanged in extend-wear contact lens users.28 However, amounts of fibronectin increase29 in tears of patients on an extended lens wear schedule. Stapleton et al.30 found that overnight contact lens wear significantly increases concentrations of total protein, sIgA, and complement proteins in comparison to tears from baseline and daily contact lens wear patients. Proteins from the tear film deposit on contact lenses. Deposits analyzed from contact lenses vary according to contact lens material and charge.31 These deposits are thought to be detrimental to contact lens wear and ocular health. Once deposited onto a lens, the proteins may alter and change their bactericidal properties. For example, lactoferrin deposited onto a contact lens actually promotes Gram-negative bacterial adhesion, once adherent, the bacteria are killed by this protein.32

The purpose of our investigation was to determine whether concentrations of sPLA2 in tears are affected by contact lens wear, whether sPLA2 deposits onto contact lenses and, if so, whether the concentration of absorbed sPLA2 is dependent on contact lens type. In addition, we examined the effect of absorbed sPLA2 on the adhesion of S. aureus to contact lenses.


   Methods
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
Results
 Discussion
 References
 
SPLA2 Concentrations from Contact Lenses and Tears
Study procedures were subject to review by the Committee on Experimental Procedures Involving Human Subjects at The University of New South Wales and were performed in accordance with the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. Thirty-nine subjects were enlisted in the 6-hour contact lens wear study and wore ionic (etafilcon A) and nonionic (Polymacon), high-water contact lenses contralaterally. Tears (approximately 5 µL) from each eye were collected into a 10-µL glass capillary tube (n = 39) before contact lens wear and before contact lens removal. Twenty-five subjects were enlisted in an extended-wear schedule and wore ionic (etafilcon A) and nonionic (Polymacon), high-water contact lenses contralaterally.

Worn contact lenses were removed, and protein and active enzyme were extracted for estimations of their levels. Lenses were extracted in 5 mL of an extraction buffer comprising 4 M urea (BDH Laboratory Supplies, Poole, UK), 0.1% sodium dodecyl sulfate (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO), 1 mM dithiothreitol (Sigma-Aldrich), 0.1 M Tris (pH 7.5; Sigma-Aldrich) at 95°C for 1.5 hours. Extracts were buffer exchanged into phosphate-buffered saline (PBS; pH 7.4) and concentrated in concentrator tubes (Centricon 10; Millipore Corp., Bedford, MA) to a final volume of 100 µL.

Concentration of sPLA2 in contact lens extracts and tears were measured by sandwich ELISA specific for sPLA2 (Cayman Chemical Co., Ann Arbor, MI). The standard used for this assay was sPLA2 from human synovial fluid and the sensitivity of the assay was 15.6 pg/mL. Catalytic activity of sPLA2 from samples was measured by using the 1,2-dithio analogue of diheptanoylphosphatidylcholine as a substrate for sPLA2 (Cayman Chemical Co.). sPLA2 catalytic activity was also measured before and after extraction conditions using the activity assay to determine the effect of the extraction process on sPLA2.

Bacterial Adhesion to sPLA2-Soaked Contact Lenses
S. aureus (strain Saur 31) isolated from a patient with a contact-lens–related peripheral ulcer was used. Bacteria were grown overnight in tryptone soya broth (Oxoid, Basingstoke, UK), washed, and resuspended in PBS supplemented with CaCl2 (0.07 M) to approximately 1 x 108 cfu/mL. Etafilcon A and Polymacon contact lenses were soaked in 20 ng/mL sPLA2 II in PBS (Sigma-Aldrich) overnight at 35°C. The amount of sPLA2 used was determined as follows. It is estimated that approximately 10% to 20% of initial concentration in a protein soak is retained on the lens, therefore we soaked contact lenses in a stock solution of 20 ng/mL to have a final amount of approximately 2 to 4 ng/lens (worn contact lens concentrations extracted from lenses in this study) of sPLA2. sPLA2-soaked lenses were then incubated in 1 mL of the bacterial suspension for 10 minutes at 35°C. After incubation, contact lenses with adherent bacteria were washed three times in PBS to remove any bacteria associated with, but not adherent to, the contact lens. Lenses were then homogenized in PBS with a dispersing tool (Ultra-Tarrax T-8; IKA Labortechnik, Rawang, Malaysia), serially diluted in PBS, plated on nutrient agar, and incubated overnight at 35°C, to enumerate viable bacteria.

Statistics
A two-tailed unpaired Student’s t-test was used to determine significant differences between amounts of sPLA2 on contact lens types and between wearing schedules. A two-tailed t-test was also used for analysis of bacterial adhesion results.


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
Discussion
 References
 
There was no significant difference in tear concentrations of sPLA2 from etafilcon A or Polymacon daily contact lens wearers. Tear concentrations of sPLA2 from baseline (before contact lens wear) and post-Polymacon contact lens wear were approximately 19 ± 8 µg/mL. Slightly less sPLA2 was detected in tears after etafilcon A contact lens wear (16 ± 10 µg/mL), but this was not significantly different from the other groups (P = 0.259).

sPLA2 was found to absorb to both types of contact lenses. Concentrations of sPLA2 extracted from etafilcon A daily-wear contact lenses were approximately 5 ng/lens. The concentrations of sPLA2 extracted from Polymacon daily-wear contact lenses was significantly less at approximately 3 ng/lens, P < 0.05 (Fig. 1A) , which corresponds to 51% less sPLA2 recovered from etafilcon A lenses. Extended-wear etafilcon A lenses had an sPLA2 concentration of approximately 6 ng/lens. Extended-wear Polymacon lenses had significantly lower concentrations of sPLA2 (3 ng/lens; P < 0.05; Fig. 1A ), corresponding to 38% less than etafilcon A lenses. No significant differences were observed between concentrations of sPLA2 extracted from extended or daily wear for etafilcon A or Polymacon contact lenses.



View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 1. (A) Amount of sPLA2 extracted from extended-wear (n = 25) and daily- (n = 39) wear contact lenses. Error bars: SD. No significant differences were observed between the daily- and extended-wear modalities. Significantly more sPLA2 was recovered from etafilcon A lenses in extended (*P = 0.02) and daily (**P = 0.002) wear than from Polymacon lenses of either lens-wear regimen, by unpaired Student’s t-test. (B) Activity of sPLA2 extracted from daily- and extended-wear contact lenses. Error bars, SD. Significantly more sPLA2 was recovered from etafilcon A lenses in extended (*P = 0.0039) and daily (**P = 0.013) wear than from Polymacon lenses of either lens wear regimen, by unpaired Student’s t-test.

 
Catalytic activity of the enzyme correlated with the amounts of protein extracted from contact lenses (Fig. 1B) . The catalytic activity of sPLA2 was significantly greater on etafilcon A contact lenses than on Polymacon contact lenses for both extended- and daily-wear contact lens wear schedules (P ≤ 0.013; Fig. 1B ). Polymacon lenses had 94% and 96% less active sPLA2 than etafilcon A daily- and extended-wear lenses, respectively. Control experiments to determine loss of activity with the extraction method demonstrated that 40% of the activity of commercially bought sPLA2 was retained after boiling in extraction buffer.

When incubated with sPLA2-coated contact lenses, the count of viable S. aureus was reduced on both contact lens types (Fig. 2) . The number of viable bacteria was reduced on etafilcon A contact lenses soaked with sPLA2 by approximately 44% compared with uncoated control etafilcon A lenses, but the number was not reduced on Polymacon contact lenses. However, differences between sPLA2-soaked and control lenses were not significant. The trend in activity correlated with that of sPLA2 concentrations detected on the two types of contact lenses (i.e., more sPLA2 was recovered from etafilcon A lenses with a corresponding lower load of viable bacterial on these lenses).



View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 2. Effect of S. aureus adhesion to contact lenses with absorbed sPLA2. Error bars, SEM. Contact lenses were soaked with 20 ng/mL sPLA2, washed, and incubated with 1 x 108 cfu S. aureus strain 31. The y-axis represents colony-forming units recovered per lens (cfu/lens). No significant differences were observed between groups.

 

   Discussion
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
References
 
This is the first report to show that sPLA2 deposits on contact lenses from the tear film in both daily- and extended-wear contact lens schedules. We have also demonstrated that the lens material type influenced the amount of enzyme deposited. Etafilcon A contact lenses absorbed more sPLA2 than Polymacon contact lenses, and the amount did not increase significantly from daily- to extended-wear contact lenses. Although we did not compare contact lens wearers to non–contact-lens wearers, Aho et al.15 found that long-term soft contact lens wearers had lower concentrations of sPLA2 in their tears than did non–contact-lens wearers. We found that there was a trend for less sPLA2 to be recovered from tears after etafilcon A lens wear, suggesting that the contact lens could be sequestering sPLA2 from the tears. Diurnal variations in sPLA2 concentrations do exist and are at their highest from 12 PM until 4 PM.33 As post–daily-wear tears were collected during this period, the effects of any contact lens sPLA2 depletion may have been masked.

In addition, increasing concentrations of sPLA2 in tears have been associated with intolerance to contact lens wear.27 No significant differences were found in sPLA2 tear concentrations of patients before and after contact lens wear, suggesting that these wearers tolerated the contact lenses well. Concentrations of sPLA2 in baseline tears in our study (19 ± 8 µg/mL) are within the range of those reported by others (55 ± 34 and 34 ± 21 µg/mL).16 34 Higher sPLA2 concentrations have also been reported (70 ± 35 and 37 ± 3 µg/mL).17 33 Combined findings indicate that concentrations of sPLA2 vary throughout the population.

We found that extended wear of contact lenses did not significantly alter amounts of sPLA2 on contact lenses, suggesting there is a saturation point for sPLA2 deposition on a contact lens. The amount of sPLA2 on contact lenses is most likely related to the charge of the lenses. sPLA2 is known to have an affinity for anionic bacterial membranes,17 35 which is due to ligand interactions and may also be partly due to cationic residues surrounding the hydrophobic rim of the enzyme.18 35 The attraction to anionic surfaces may be one reason why more sPLA2 is recovered from etafilcon A contact lenses, as these lenses are anionic, whereas Polymacon contact lenses are nonionic.

The sPLA2 remained active on the contact lenses. Polymacon lenses had 50% less total but 90% less active sPLA2 than etafilcon A lenses. For both contact lens types, activity appeared to be 10 times less, which may be a result of the extraction process, as experiments mimicking extraction conditions yielded low amounts of initial sPLA2 activity. However, the results reported herein imply that contact lenses absorb sPLA2 and maintain active sPLA2 on the lens surface which, in turn, may render the contact lens antibacterial. We tested this hypothesis by applying sPLA2 on unworn etafilcon A and Polymacon contact lenses. We found that etafilcon A had reduced counts of viable S. aureus compared with Polymacon contact lenses. These results demonstrate that increasing sPLA2 absorbed onto a contact lens may result in a concomitant reduction in bacterial adhesion to the contact lens.

The sequestering of this antibacterial agent from the tear film onto the contact lens may be protective for the cornea against contact-lens–associated staphylococcal infection. With the knowledge that this enzyme is also antibacterial for Gram-negative bacteria,23 24 these findings may have implications for strategies in material design aimed at the reduction of contact-lens–driven adverse responses.


   Footnotes
 
Presented in part at the annual meeting of the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, May 2002.

Supported by the Australian Federal Government through the Co-operative Research Centres Program (Vision CRC).

Submitted for publication November 13, 2003; revised April 7, and May 28, 2004; accepted June 4, 2004.

Disclosure: E.B.H. Hume, None; N. Cole, None; A. Parmar, None; M.E. Tan, None; Y. Aliwarga, None; T. Schubert, None; B.A. Holden, None; M.D.P. Willcox, None

The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by page charge payment. This article must therefore be marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. §1734 solely to indicate this fact.

Corresponding author: Emma B. H. Hume, Vision Cooperative Research Centre, The University of New South Wales, Sydney NSW 2052, Australia; e.hume{at}visioncrc.org.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Asbell P, Stenson S. Ulcerative keratitis: survey of 30 years’ laboratory experience. Arch Ophthalmol. 1982;100:77–80.[Abstract]
  2. Jalbert I, Willcox MDP, Sweeney D. Isolation of Staphylococcus aureus from a contact lens at the time of a contact lens-induced peripheral ulcer: case report. Cornea. 2000;19:116–120.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  3. Janssen PT, van Bijsterveld OP. Origin and biosynthesis of human tear fluid proteins. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1983;24:623–630.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Gachon A-M, Richard J, Dastugue B. Human tears: normal protein pattern and individual protein determinations in adults. Curr Eye Res. 1983;2:301–308.
  5. Gachon AM, Verrelle P, Betail G, Dastugue B. Immunological and electrophoretic studies of human tear proteins. Exp Eye Res. 1979;29:539–553.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  6. Delaire A, Lassagne H, Gachon AM. New members of the lipocalin family in human tear fluid. Exp Eye Res. 1992;55:645–647.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  7. Lassagne H, Gachon AM. Cloning of a human lacrimal lipocalin secreted in tears. Exp Eye Res. 1993;56:605–609.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  8. Sack RA, Underwood PA, Tan KO, Sutherland H, Morris CA. Vitronectin: contribution to the closed-eye external host-defence mechanism. Ocul Immunol Inflamm. 1993;1:327–336.
  9. Sengör T, Gürgül S, Ögretmenoglu S, Kiliç , Erker H. Tear immunology in contact lens wearers. Contactalogia. 1990;12:43–45.
  10. Cheng KH, Spanjaard L, Rutten H, et al. Immunoglobulin A antibodies against Pseudomonas aeruginosa in the tear fluid of contact lens wearers. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1996;37:2081–2088.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Willcox MDP, Morris CA, Sack RA, et al. Complement and complement regulatory proteins in human tears. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997;31:1119–1126.
  12. Moreau JM, Girgis DO, Hume EBH, et al. Phospholipase A2 in rabbit tears: a host defense against Staphylococcus aureus. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:2347–2354.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Nevalainen TJ, Aho HJ, Peuravuori H. Secretion of group 2 phospholipase A2 by lacrimal glands. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1994;35:417–421.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Aho HJ, Saari KM, Kallajoki M, Nevalainen TJ. Synthesis of group II phospholipase A2 and lysozyme in lacrimal glands. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1996;37:1826–1832.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Aho VV, Nevalainen TJ, Saari KM. Group IIA phospholipase A2 content of basal, nonstimulated and reflex tears. Curr Eye Res. 2002;24:224–227.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  16. Matti Saari K, Aho VV, Paavilainen V, Nevalainen TJ. Group II PLA2 content of tears in normal subjects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:318–320.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Qu X-D, Lehrer RL. Secretory phospholipase A2 is the principal bactericide for Staphylococci and other Gram-positive bacteria in human tears. Infect Immunol. 1998;66:2791–2797.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Beers SA, Buckland AG, Koduri RS, et al. The antibacterial properties of secreted phospholipase A2. J Biol Chem. 2002;277:1788–1793.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Weinrauch Y, Elsbach P, Zmasen LM, Foreman A, Weiss J. The potent anti-Staphylococcus aureus activity of sterile rabbit inflammatory fluid is due to 14kD phospholipase A2. J Clin Invest. 1996;97:250–257.[ISI][Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  20. Dominiecki ME, Weiss J. Antibacterial action of extracellular mammalian group IIA phospholipase A2 against grossly clumped Staphylococcus aureus. Infect Immun. 1999;67:2299–2305.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Gronroos JO, Laine VJ, Janssen MJ, Egmond MR, Nevalainen TJ. Bactericidal properties of group IIA and group V phospholipases A2. J Immunol. 2001;166:4029–4034.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Buckland AG, Heeley EL, Wilton DC. Bacterial cell membrane hydrolysis by secreted phospholipase A2: a major physiological role of human group IIA sPLA2 involving both bacterial cell wall penetration and interfacial catalysis. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2000;1484:195–206.[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  23. Harwig SS, Tan L, Qu XD, et al. Bactericidal properties of murine intestinal phospholipase A2. J Clin Invest. 1995;95:603–610.
  24. Forst S, Weiss J, Elsbach P. The role of phospholipase-A2 lysines in phospholipolysis of Escherichia coli killed by a membrane active neutrophil protein. J Biol Chem. 1982;257:4055–4057.
  25. Raguenes-Nicol C, Russo-Marie F, Domage G, et al. Anti-inflammatory mechanism of alminoprofen: action on the phospholipid metabolism pathway. Biochem Pharmacol. 1999;57:433–443.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  26. Triggiani M, Granata F, Oriente A, et al. Secretory phospholipases A2 induce cytokine release from blood and synovial fluid monocytes. Eur J Immunol. 2002;32:67–76.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  27. Glasson MJ, Stapleton F, Willcox MDP. Lipid, lipase and lipocalin differences between tolerant and intolerant contact lens wearers. Curr Eye Res. 2002;25:227–235.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  28. Carney FP, Morris CA, Willcox MDP. The effect of hydrogel lens wear on the major tear proteins during extended wear. Aust NZ J Ophthalmol. 1997;25:36–38.
  29. Baleriola-Lucas C, Fukuda M, Willcox MD, Sweeney DF, Holden BA. Fibronectin concentration in tears of contact lens wearers. Exp Eye Res. 1997;64:37–43.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  30. Stapleton F, Willcox MDP, Morris CA, Sweeney DF. Tear changes in contact lens wearers following overnight eye closure. Curr Eye Res. 1998;17:183–188.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  31. Fowler SA, Korb DR, Allansmith MR. Deposits on soft contact lenses of various water contents. CLAO J. 1985;11:124–127.[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  32. Williams TJ, Schneider PR, Willcox MDP. The effect of protein-coated contact lenses on the adhesion and viability of gram negative bacteria. Curr Eye Res. 2003;27:227–235.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  33. Aho VV, Paavilainen V, Nevalainen TJ, Peuravuori H, Saari KM. Diurnal variation in group IIa phospholipase A2 content in tears of contact lens wearers and normal controls. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2003;241:85–88.[ISI][Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  34. Aho VV, Nevalainen TJ, Saari KM. Group IIA phospholipase content of tears in patients with keratoconjunctivitis sicca. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2002;240:521–523.[ISI][Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  35. Berg OG, Gelb MH, Tsai M-D, Jain MK. Interfacial enzymology: the secreted phospholipase A2-paradigm. Chem Rev. 2001;101:2613–2653.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]




This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hume, E. B. H.
Right arrow Articles by Willcox, M. D. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hume, E. B. H.
Right arrow Articles by Willcox, M. D. P.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS