Purpose: We compared Ethyl-6-O-decanoyl-glucoside 0.005% (EDG) combined with 0.00025% chlorhexidine acetate (EDGC) to a commercial polyaminpropylbiguanide (PAPB).
Methods: Fifty-nine subjects wearing both ionic and non-ionic contact lenses for 8-16 hours daily used either EDGC or PAPB as a cleaning and disinfectant agent. Neither mechanical nor separate cleaning agents were employed. The study period was for 8 weeks. The following symptoms were compared for each solution: blurred vision, dryness, foreign body sensation, redness, and dirty lenses. The following signs were also compared for each solution: conjunctival hyperemia, papillary hypertrophy, corneal deposits, purulence, limbal vascularization, subepithelial scarring, visual acuity, bulbar hyperemia, and tear breakup time.
Results: After 8 weeks, 52% of the subjects in the EDGC group showed no evidence of corneal or conjunctival abnormalities. In contrast, only 19% of the subjects in the PAPB group showed no abnormalities of the conjunctiva or cornea (P = 0.012). After 8 weeks, 25% of the EDGC group showed evidence of papillary hypertrophy, whereas 50% of the PAPB group showed similar findings (P = 0.007). In addition, after 8 weeks of wear, 21% of the subjects using EDGC had positive conjunctival cultures, whereas the rate of positive cultures in the PAPB group was 50% (P = 0.035). At the conclusion of the study, the protein contents of the lenses were 131 micrograms +/- 48 micrograms (N = 29) in the EDGC group and 185 micrograms +/- 65 micrograms (N = 26) in the PAPB group (P = 0.001).
Conclusion: Subjects using EDGC had fewer pathological findings than subjects using PAPB as their cleaning and disinfecting agent. The mechanism by which EDGC reduced the rate of papillary hypertrophy needs further investigation.