Comparison of antimicrobial efficacy and safety of pulsed versus continuous wave UVC.

IF 4.1 3区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Sanjay Marasini, Simon J Dean, Simon Swift, Jennifer P Craig
{"title":"Comparison of antimicrobial efficacy and safety of pulsed versus continuous wave UVC.","authors":"Sanjay Marasini, Simon J Dean, Simon Swift, Jennifer P Craig","doi":"10.1016/j.clae.2025.102437","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Preclinical studies have confirmed efficacy of ultraviolet C (UVC) light in managing superficial corneal infections. This study sought to establish if delivering UVC in pulsed form enhances antimicrobial efficacy compared to continuous delivery, and whether pulsed delivery in ocular tissue results in deeper penetration or introduces additional safety concerns.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study compared antimicrobial efficacy, depth of penetration, and safety of continuous versus pulsed wave delivery of UVC (20 Hz, 50% duty cycle) in three experimental setups. Firstly, efficacy was assessed using a simulated in vitro corneal wound model infected with bioluminescent P. aeruginosa, comparing matched-fluence, 0 to 120 s continuous wave versus 0 to 240 s pulsed wave exposures. Secondly, penetrability was evaluated in an ex vivo porcine corneal model (0 to 650 µm thickness). Lastly, safety was analyzed by immunohistochemistry to assess DNA photoproducts, cyclobutene pyrimidine dimers (CPD), focusing on their spatial distribution and density after UVC exposure (579 mJ/cm<sup>2</sup>).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Comparable antimicrobial efficacy was observed for continuous and pulsed wave UVC (50% duty cycle) for all exposure durations (p > 0.05), except the 40 s pulsed wave, which was more effective than the 20 s continuous wave (p < 0.05). Corneal UVC transmission was limited and comparable for both delivery modes (all p > 0.05). Immunohistochemistry confirmed CPD were confined to the superficial corneal epithelial layers, with no significant differences in depth or extent of CPD formation between pulsed and continuous wave delivery modes (p > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In in vitro and ex vivo testing, pulsed wave UVC demonstrated antimicrobial efficacy that was at least as good as continuous wave delivery, demonstrated comparable corneal depth penetration, and similar spatial distribution of CPD.</p>","PeriodicalId":49087,"journal":{"name":"Contact Lens & Anterior Eye","volume":" ","pages":"102437"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contact Lens & Anterior Eye","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2025.102437","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Preclinical studies have confirmed efficacy of ultraviolet C (UVC) light in managing superficial corneal infections. This study sought to establish if delivering UVC in pulsed form enhances antimicrobial efficacy compared to continuous delivery, and whether pulsed delivery in ocular tissue results in deeper penetration or introduces additional safety concerns.

Methods: This study compared antimicrobial efficacy, depth of penetration, and safety of continuous versus pulsed wave delivery of UVC (20 Hz, 50% duty cycle) in three experimental setups. Firstly, efficacy was assessed using a simulated in vitro corneal wound model infected with bioluminescent P. aeruginosa, comparing matched-fluence, 0 to 120 s continuous wave versus 0 to 240 s pulsed wave exposures. Secondly, penetrability was evaluated in an ex vivo porcine corneal model (0 to 650 µm thickness). Lastly, safety was analyzed by immunohistochemistry to assess DNA photoproducts, cyclobutene pyrimidine dimers (CPD), focusing on their spatial distribution and density after UVC exposure (579 mJ/cm2).

Results: Comparable antimicrobial efficacy was observed for continuous and pulsed wave UVC (50% duty cycle) for all exposure durations (p > 0.05), except the 40 s pulsed wave, which was more effective than the 20 s continuous wave (p < 0.05). Corneal UVC transmission was limited and comparable for both delivery modes (all p > 0.05). Immunohistochemistry confirmed CPD were confined to the superficial corneal epithelial layers, with no significant differences in depth or extent of CPD formation between pulsed and continuous wave delivery modes (p > 0.05).

Conclusions: In in vitro and ex vivo testing, pulsed wave UVC demonstrated antimicrobial efficacy that was at least as good as continuous wave delivery, demonstrated comparable corneal depth penetration, and similar spatial distribution of CPD.

脉冲与连续波UVC抗菌效果及安全性的比较。
目的:临床前研究证实了紫外线C (UVC)光治疗浅表性角膜感染的疗效。本研究试图确定脉冲给药是否比连续给药更能提高UVC的抗菌效果,以及脉冲给药是否会导致更深的穿透或带来额外的安全问题。方法:本研究在三个实验装置中比较了UVC (20 Hz, 50%占空比)连续波传递与脉冲波传递的抗菌功效、渗透深度和安全性。首先,通过模拟生物发光铜绿假单胞菌感染的体外角膜伤口模型,比较匹配影响,0 ~ 120 s连续波和0 ~ 240 s脉冲波暴露的效果。其次,在离体猪角膜模型(0至650µm厚度)中评估穿透性。最后,通过免疫组织化学分析DNA光产物环丁烯嘧啶二聚体(CPD)的安全性,重点研究其在UVC暴露后的空间分布和密度(579 mJ/cm2)。结果:UVC连续波与脉冲波(50%占空比)在所有暴露时间下的抗菌效果相当(p < 0.05),但40 s脉冲波比20 s连续波更有效(p < 0.05)。免疫组织化学证实CPD局限于角膜浅表上皮层,脉冲和连续波传递模式在CPD形成的深度和程度上无显著差异(p > 0.05)。结论:在体外和离体试验中,脉冲波UVC的抗菌效果至少与连续波传递一样好,具有相似的角膜深度穿透性和相似的CPD空间分布。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
18.80%
发文量
198
审稿时长
55 days
期刊介绍: Contact Lens & Anterior Eye is a research-based journal covering all aspects of contact lens theory and practice, including original articles on invention and innovations, as well as the regular features of: Case Reports; Literary Reviews; Editorials; Instrumentation and Techniques and Dates of Professional Meetings.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信