BACKGROUNDNonselective muscarinic receptor antagonist, atropine, was believed to inhibit myopic progression. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy, through topical administration, of the M1-selective muscarinic antagonist pirenzepine in preventing experimentally induced form-deprivation myopia in guinea pigs.

METHODSFifty-three guinea pigs, which underwent monocular deprivation with their eyelids sutured, were divided into 6 groups. Three groups were treated with 1%, 2% or 4% pirenzepine ophthalmic solutions; the fourth group with atropine; the fifth with saline and the last group left untreated. Ocular refraction, in vivo biometric measurements and wet eye weight were collected before and after the experiment. All the eyes were finally enucleated for histopathological examination to evaluate the possible toxic effects on ocular structures.

RESULTSAnimals untreated or treated with saline produced (-2.31+/-1.47) D and (-2.25+/-0.88) D of axial myopia respectively. Those treated with 1% pirenzepine ophthalmic solution produced relative myopia of (-1.63+/-0.48) D, and those under the treatment of 2% and 4% pirenzepine ophthalmic solution only developed a relative myopia of (-0.89+/-0.42) D and (-0.70+/-0.41) D (F=9.56, P<0.05). The significant reduction in myopia in 2% and 4% pirenzepine treated animals was caused by significantly less vitreous chamber elongation and axial elongation of the deprived eyes [2% group: (0.009+/-0.052) mm, 4% group: (0.006+/-0.078) mm] when compared with untreated, saline treated or 1% pirenzepine treated guinea pigs (0.057+/-0.056) mm, (0.064+/-0.053) mm and (0.033+/-0.035) mm, respectively]. Histological examinations revealed no obviously toxic effects on the eyes treated with pirenzepine.

CONCLUSIONTopical administration of the M1-selective muscarinic antagonist, pirenzepine, can prevent induced form-deprivation myopia in guinea pigs by inhibiting axial elongation without obvious damage to ocular tissues.

Animals ; Eye ; drug effects ; pathology ; Guinea Pigs ; Muscarinic Antagonists ; therapeutic use ; Myopia ; prevention & control ; Ophthalmic Solutions ; Organ Size ; drug effects ; Pirenzepine ; therapeutic use ; Refraction, Ocular ; drug effects

A 32-year-old female who had undergone the silicone oil removal procedure presented with visual disturbance in her left eye. Several months previous, she had cataract surgery in a private clinic, and a month later she had a Nd:YAG laser procedure for posterior capsulotomy. The slit-lamp examination revealed silicone oil droplets that had adhered to the intraocular lens where the posterior capsulotomy was performed. She had experienced high myopia as a manifestation of the resulting refractive changes. We replaced the previous intraocular lens with a new acrylic intraocular lens with resulting improvement to her vision. Here we report the case of a female patient with a history of silicone oil removal surgery where the resulting silicone bubbles had not been removed thoroughly and remained in the vitreous cavity. These bubbles subsequently adhered to the intraocular lens following YAG laser posterior capsulotomy, resulting in refractive changes. We recommend that implanting a silicone intraocular lens in anyone with a history of the silicone oil removal procedure or who has a possible history of silicone oil use should be avoided.
Adult ; Capsulorhexis/*methods ; Female ; Humans ; Laser Therapy/*methods ; Lasers, Solid-State/*therapeutic use ; Lenses, Intraocular/*adverse effects ; Myopia/*chemically induced/physiopathology/surgery ; Prosthesis Failure ; Refraction, Ocular/*drug effects ; Reoperation ; Silicone Oils/*adverse effects