English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Introduction Open-globe ocular injuries have increased in frequency in recent combat operations due to increased use of explosive weaponry. Unfortunately, open-globe injuries have one of the worst visual outcomes for the injured warfighter, often resulting in permanent loss of vision. To improve visual recovery, injuries need to be stabilized quickly following trauma, in order to restore intraocular pressure and create a watertight seal. Here, we assess four off-the-shelf (OTS), commercially available tissue adhesives for their ability to seal military-relevant corneal perforation injuries (CPIs). Materials and Methods Adhesives were assessed using an anterior segment inflation platform and a previously developed high-speed benchtop corneal puncture model, to create injuries in porcine eyes. After injury, adhesives were applied and injury stabilization was assessed by measuring outflow rate, ocular compliance, and burst pressure, followed by histological analysis. Results Tegaderm dressings and Dermabond skin adhesive most successfully sealed injuries in preliminary testing. Across a range of injury sizes and shapes, Tegaderm performed well in smaller injury sizes, less than 2 mm in diameter, but inadequately sealed large or complex injuries. Dermabond created a watertight seal capable of maintaining ocular tissue at physiological intraocular pressure for almost all injury shapes and sizes. However, application of the adhesive was inconsistent. Histologically, after removal of the Dermabond skin adhesive, the corneal epithelium was removed and oftentimes the epithelium surface penetrated into the wound and was adhered to inner stromal tissue. Conclusions Dermabond can stabilize a wide range of CPIs; however, application is variable, which may adversely impact the corneal tissue. Without addressing these limitations, no OTS adhesive tested herein can be directly translated to CPIs. This highlights the need for development of a biomaterial product to stabilize these injuries without causing ocular damage upon removal, thus improving the poor vision prognosis for the injured warfighter.

Assessment of Commercial Off-the-Shelf Tissue Adhesives for Sealing Military-Relevant Corneal Perforation Injuries