A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Tear fluid collection in dogs and cats using ophthalmic sponges. | LitMetric

Tear fluid collection in dogs and cats using ophthalmic sponges.

Vet Ophthalmol

Department of Biomedical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.

Published: May 2018

Objective: To compare the use of two ophthalmic sponges for tear collection in dogs and cats.

Animals Studied: Ten healthy dogs and 10 healthy cats.

Procedures: A strip (4 × 10 mm) of either cellulose or polyvinyl acetal (PVA) sponge was inserted into the ventral fornix of each eye for either 15, 30, or 60 s. The wetted strip was placed into a 0.2-mL tube that was first punctured at its bottom. Tears were eluted through the drainage hole into a 1.5-mL tube via centrifugation. Tear volume absorbed (VA) and tear volume recovered (VR) were calculated as the difference of the post- and precollection weight of the 0.2-mL tube and 1.5-mL tube, respectively. Recovery ratio (RR) was determined as the ratio between VR and VA.

Results: Ophthalmic sponges were well tolerated by all subjects. In dogs and cats, median (95% range) VA, VR, and RR were as follows: 44 μL (11-106 μL) and 16 μL (2-43 μL); 27 μL (1-84 μL) and 6 μL (0-29 μL); 64% (7-91%) and 35% (0-86%), respectively. PVA sponges achieved significantly greater VR in cats and RR in both species. All parameters were significantly greater with a collection time of 60 vs. 30 and 15 s. Body weight was associated with VA and VR in dogs but not cats.

Conclusions: Polyvinyl acetal is better than cellulose for tear collection given its superior recovery. Ophthalmic sponges could facilitate routine analysis of tear fluid in dogs and cats, although further studies are needed to evaluate the quality of tears obtained with this method.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/vop.12502DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

ophthalmic sponges
16
dogs cats
12
tear fluid
8
collection dogs
8
tear collection
8
polyvinyl acetal
8
02-ml tube
8
15-ml tube
8
tear volume
8
tear
6

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!