The Berkeley Dry Eye Flow Chart: A fast, functional screening instrument for contact lens-induced dryness.

PurposeIn this article, we introduce a novel flow chart-based screening tool for the categorization of contact lens-induced dryness (CLIDE) and its impact on daily visual activities: the Berkeley Dry Eye Flow Chart (DEFC).MethodsOne hundred thirty (130) experienced soft contact lens wearers discontinued lens wear for 24 hrs, passed a baseline screening and eye health examination, completed the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) then were dispensed fresh pairs of their habitual lenses. After 6 hrs of wear, subjects were administered a battery of symptom questionnaires, and underwent non-invasive tear breakup time (NITBUT) measurement, grading of distortion in reflected topographer mires, grading of lens surface wettability, and a fluorescein examination of the ocular surface. Subjects returned after at least 48 hrs and repeated all assessments after 6 hrs of wear of a second fresh pair of habitual lenses.ResultsThe repeatability of the DEFC between visits was within 1%, and Limits of Agreement and Coefficient of Repeatability were comparable to those of the other CLIDE assessments. Higher DEFC score was significantly related to shorter pre-lens NITBUT, higher OSDI score, and higher Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ratings of average and end-of-day severity and frequency of dryness (all p < 0.001). For CLIDE as diagnosed based on DEFC score, the highest sensitivities and specificities were achieved by the OSDI and VAS ratings; pre-lens NITBUT exhibited good sensitivity but poor specificity. The optimum pre-lens NITBUT diagnostic threshold was found to be ≤ 2.0 sec for debilitating CLIDE, and the OSDI threshold was ≥ 11.4.ConclusionsThe DEFC provides a means of quickly categorizing CLIDE patients based on severity and frequency of symptoms, and on the degree to which symptoms impact daily life. The DEFC has several potential advantages as a CLIDE screening and monitoring tool, has good repeatability, and is significantly related to commonly employed clinical assessments for CLIDE

Right ventricular adaptation and failure in pulmonary arterial hypertension

Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is an obstructive pulmonary vasculopathy, characterized by excess proliferation, apoptosis resistance, inflammation, fibrosis, and vasoconstriction. Although PAH therapies target some of these vascular abnormalities (primarily vasoconstriction), most do not directly benefit the right ventricle (RV). This is suboptimal because a patient's functional state and prognosis are largely determined by the success of the adaptation of the RV to the increased afterload. The RV initially hypertrophies but might ultimately decompensate, becoming dilated, hypokinetic, and fibrotic. A number of pathophysiologic abnormalities have been identified in the PAH RV, including: ischemia and hibernation (partially reflecting RV capillary rarefaction), autonomic activation (due to G protein receptor kinase 2-mediated downregulation and desensitization of β-adrenergic receptors), mitochondrial-metabolic abnormalities (notably increased uncoupled glycolysis and glutaminolysis), and fibrosis. Many RV abnormalities are detectable using molecular imaging and might serve as biomarkers. Some molecular pathways, such as those regulating angiogenesis, metabolism, and mitochondrial dynamics, are similarly deranged in the RV and pulmonary vasculature, offering the possibility of therapies that treat the RV and pulmonary circulation. An important paradigm in PAH is that the RV and pulmonary circulation constitute a unified cardiopulmonary unit. Clinical trials of PAH pharmacotherapies should assess both components of the cardiopulmonary unit

Sensitivity and specificity of CLIDE assessments for two DEFC-based diagnoses.

<p>Sensitivity and specificity of CLIDE assessments for two DEFC-based diagnoses.</p

Baseline subject characteristics.

<p>Baseline subject characteristics.</p

Potential pitfalls in using assessments that are significantly associated with CLIDE outcomes as diagnostic instruments.

<p>There is clear separation between CLIDE-negative (filled circles) and CLIDE-positive (open triangles) subjects; however, there are subjects with VAS ratings above the diagnostic thresholds (No/Mild Symptoms vs. Debilitating Symptoms thresholds shown) who do not have CLIDE (false-positives), as well as those with VAS ratings below the thresholds who do have CLIDE (false-negatives).</p

Difference-vs.-mean plot of DEFC scores.

<p>The mean difference in DEFC scores (Visit 2 –Visit 1) was 0.05 units (1.00%) on the 5-point DEFC scale. There was no pattern of dependence of the inter-visit difference on the size of the mean. The discrete ordinal DEFC scores are jittered to reveal coincident data.</p