Impact of Cosmetics on the Physical Dimension and Optical Performance of Silicone Hydrogel Contact Lenses.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of cosmetics on silicone hydrogel (SiHy) contact lens shape, lens power, and optical performance. METHODS: In this in vitro experiment, 7 SiHy materials were coated with 9 marketed brands of cosmetics, including hand creams (HCs) (3), eye makeup removers (MRs) (3), and mascaras (3). Diameter, sagittal depth, and base curve were determined using the Chiltern (Optimec Limited), whereas lens power and optical performance were assessed using the Contest Plus (Rotlex). Six replicates were used for each lens and cosmetic combination. Measurements were repeated after a cleaning cycle using a one-step hydrogen peroxide solution. RESULTS: Makeup removers had the greatest impact on diameter, sagittal depth, and base curve, resulting in changes of up to 0.5, 0.15, and 0.77 mm, respectively. The HCs and mascaras had little impact on these parameters; however, differences were observed between lens types. Optical performance was reduced with all mascaras, and a decrease of greater than 2 units on a 0 to 10 scale (10=uniform power distribution) was seen for 5 lens types exposed to waterproof mascara (P<0.01). Most HCs and MRs had minimal impact on image quality. Lens power did not change with any of the cosmetics (± 0.25 diopter; P>0.05). Lens cleaning resulted in some recovery of the lens parameters, and efficiency varied between cosmetics. CONCLUSION: Some eye MRs and waterproof mascaras changed the shape and optical performance of some SiHy lenses. Further research is needed to understand the clinical implications for SiHy lens wearers using cosmetics.

Impact of Cosmetics on the Surface Properties of Silicone Hydrogel Contact Lenses.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the impact of various cosmetics on the surface properties of silicone hydrogel (SiHy) contact lens materials. METHODS: In this in vitro experiment, 7 SiHy contact lens materials were coated with 1 of 9 cosmetics, including common hand creams (3), eye makeup removers (3), and mascaras (3). Dark-field microscopy images were taken to determine pixel brightness (PB) after cosmetic exposure, which describes the visible surface deposition (n=6 for each lens type), with a higher PB indicating increased deposition. The sessile drop technique was used to determine the advancing contact angle (CA). Measurements were repeated for both methods after a single peroxide-based cleaning cycle. RESULTS: Pixel brightness was significantly higher for mascara-coated lenses compared with the other cosmetic products (P<0.01). The peroxide-based lens care solution removed most deposits from the nonwaterproof mascara for 4 lens types, whereas deposits remained relatively unchanged for 1 waterproof mascara (P>0.05). Hand creams and makeup remover had minimal impact on PB. Changes in CA measurements after cosmetic application were highly lens dependent. Hand creams caused primarily a decrease in CA for 5 of the 7 lens types, whereas 1 of the waterproof mascaras caused a significant increase of 30 to 50° for 3 lens types. CONCLUSION: Some mascara-lens combinations resulted in increased CA and PB, which could have an impact on in vivo lens performance. Nonwaterproof mascara was mostly removed after a cleaning cycle. Further research is needed to understand the clinical implications for SiHy lens wearers using cosmetics.