Sympathetic swelling response of the control eye to soft lenses in the other eye.

Purpose: To compare central corneal swelling and light scatter after 8 hours of sleep in eyes wearing high- and low-Dk hydrogel lenses and to the contralateral control eyes.

Methods: Twenty neophyte subjects wore a Lotrafilcon A (Dk, 140; Ciba Vision, Duluth GA) silicone hydrogel lens and an Etafilcon A (Dk, 18; Acuvue; Vistakon, Jacksonville, FL) 58% water content hydrogel lens of similar center thickness in random order in the right eye only, for overnight 8-hour periods. The contralateral nonwearing left eyes served as controls. Central corneal thickness was measured using an optical pachometer and light scatter using a Van den Berg stray-light meter before lens insertion, after lens removal on waking, and every 20 minutes for the next 3 hours.

Results: Central corneal swelling induced by the Etafilcon A lens on eye opening was significantly higher than with the Lotrafilcon A lens (8.66%+/-2.84% versus 2.71%+/-1.91%; P<0.00001). Light scatter induced by the Etafilcon A lens on eye opening was significantly higher than with the Lotrafilcon A lens (46.09+/-5.62 versus 42.78+/-6.07 Van den Berg units, P = 0.0078). The swelling of the control eyes paired with the Etafilcon A lens-wearing eyes was also slightly but significantly higher than that of the control eyes paired with the Lotrafilcon A lens-wearing eyes (2.34%+/-1.26% versus 1.44%+/-0.91%; P = 0.0002). Light-scatter measurements were not significantly different between control sets of eyes but showed the same trend.

Conclusions: In neophyte subjects, corneal swelling of the contralateral control eyes appears to be influenced by the swelling of the fellow lens-wearing eyes-that is, the swelling of the contralateral control eye was significantly lower when there was less swelling of the fellow eye wearing the high-Dk lens. Although there was no statistically significant difference in light-scatter measurements between the control sets of eyes, a trend similar to the corneal swelling results was observed, which could be used to support the suggestion that this may be a sympathetic physiological response rather than an unusual sampling coincidence.