Lid Margin And Conjunctival Microbial Flora Following Punctum Occlusion

May 22, 2009 updated by: Lahey Clinic
To determine if the types and amount of bacteria or other germs change over time after the routine procedure of blockage of tear drainage duct in the treatment of dry eye condition or other condition benefiting from a tear drainage blockage

Study Overview

Detailed Description

This study will investigate the impact of punctal occlusion on the ocular microbial flora. Current thought is that punctal occlusion causes retention of inflammatory mediators on the ocular surface which may produce pathology, we hypothesize that blockage of the nasolacrimal drainage system may allow colonization of the ocular surface by potentially pathogenic ubiquitous organisms (which may produce exotoxins and other biologic products) that may be responsible for signs and symptoms seen in some patients. Additionally, the presence of the silicone foreign body(punctal plug) may act as a nidus for bacterial adhesion with biofilm production (which is known to occur with Pseudomonas sp and other organisms). There would thus be a paradigm shift of our current understanding of the pathophysiology of punctal occlusion. Additionally, the choice of antimicrobials for the treatment of infections in patients with punctal occlusion may need to be modified if the microbial flora is found to be different in patients with punctal occlusion.

The ocular flora may be different inpatients with severe dry eye or other chronic pathologic conditions, which are frequent indications for punctal occlusion. However, from our retrospective review, we could not determine if there was a change in the microbial flora following plug placement with colonization with these "unusual organisms" since baseline cultures prior to punctal plug placement were not obtained.

We will try to differentiate any effect on the microbial flora caused by the silicone plug or acrylic plug(as a foreign body) versus the punctal closure by thermocautery. (Punctal thermocauterization is an alternative method of punctal closure which is 1) the preferred choice by some ophthalmologists for all their cases, or 2) when the dry eye is severe and irreversible punctal occlusion is desired or 3) if punctal plugs can not be retained due to the large size of the patients punctal). The thermodynamic hydrophobic acrylic plug(SmartPLUG) approved by the FDA for punctal occlusion with the same indications as the traditional silicone plug.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

55

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Massachusetts
      • Burlington, Massachusetts, United States, 01805
        • Lahey Clinic, Inc.
      • Peabody, Massachusetts, United States, 01960
        • Lahey Clinic North

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • 18 years and older
  • Able to sign Informed Consent
  • Clinical indication for punctal plug insertion or punctal cautery or symptomatic patients who have previously had punctal occlusion
  • Clinical indication for punctal plug removal(Partial extrusion, discomfort) increased signs of ocular irritation with punctate keratopathy, punctal inflammation).
  • Able to make follow up visit schedule

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Subjects without dry eye

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: 2

Up to 5 subjects. Subjects in need of punctal occlusion(No preference for punctal thermocauterization or punctal occlusion by silicone plug). Randomize one eye to silicone punctal plug occlusion, the other eye to punctal thermocauterization.

This group ONLY, cultures will be obtained of the lid margin & conjunctiva/inferior fornix of BOTH eyes

Active Comparator: 1
25 subjects(20 silicone punctal plugs, 5 punctal cautery) The procedure will be based on clinical indication. Randomized one eye for study. Baseline cultures of lid margin & tarsal/inferior fornix conjunctiva obtained & plated according to protocol
Active Comparator: 3

Up to 5 subjects. Subjects in need of punctal occlusion(not preference for punctal occlusion by silicone plug or by the thermodynamic hydrophobic acrylic plug). Randomize one eye to silicone punctal plug occlusion, the other eye to acrylic punctal plug occlusion.

In this group ONLY cultures will be obtained of the lid margin and conjunctiva/inferior fornix of BOTH eyes

Active Comparator: 4

Up to 20 subjects(15 subjects with silicone punctal plug closure and 5 subjects with punctal closure by thermocauterization)Subjects who have previously had punctal occlusion who have symptoms and/or signs thought to be secondary to punctal occlusion.

Lid margin and conjunctiva/inferior fornix of eye with greatest sign or symptoms will be cultured/plated according to standard protocol.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Impact of punctal occlusion on the ocular microbial flora
Time Frame: 1 year(3mo, 6mo, 12 mo culture/follow up visits)
1 year(3mo, 6mo, 12 mo culture/follow up visits)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Sarkis H. Soukiasian, M.D., Lahey Clinic, Inc.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

July 1, 2003

Primary Completion (Actual)

April 1, 2009

Study Completion (Actual)

May 1, 2009

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

August 13, 2008

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 13, 2008

First Posted (Estimate)

August 15, 2008

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

May 25, 2009

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 22, 2009

Last Verified

May 1, 2009

More Information

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Dry Eye Syndrome

Clinical Trials on Punctal plugs, punctal cautery

Subscribe