title: Qualitative and quantitative characterization of the in vitro dehydration process of hydrogel contact lenses.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To investigate the in vitro dehydration process of conventional hydrogel and silicone-hydrogel contact lens materials.
  
  
  METHODS
  Eight conventional hydrogel and five silicone-hydrogel contact lenses were dehydrated under controlled environmental conditions on an analytical balance. Data were taken at 1-min intervals and dehydration curves of cumulative dehydration (CD), valid dehydration (VD), and dehydration rate (DR) were obtained. Several quantitative descriptors of the dehydration process were obtained by further processing of the information.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Duration of phase I (r(2) = 0.921), CD at end of phase I (r(2) = 0.971), time to achieve a DR of -1%/min (r(2) = 0.946) were strongly correlated with equilibrium water content (EWC) of the materials. For each individual sample, the VD at different time intervals can be accurately determined using a 2nd order regression equation (r(2) > 0.99 for all samples). The first 5 min of the dehydration process show a relatively uniform average CD of about -1.5%/min. After that, there was a trend towards higher average CD for the following 15 min as the EWC of the material increases (r(2) = 0.701). As a consequence, average VD for the first 5 min displayed a negative correlation with EWC (r(2) = 0.835), and a trend towards uniformization among CL materials for the following periods (r(2) = 0.014). Overall, silicone-hydrogel materials display a lower dehydration, but this seems to be primarily due to their lower EWC.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  DR curves under the conditions of the present study can be described as a three-phase process. Phase I consists of a relatively uniform DR with a duration that ranges from 10 to almost 60 min and is strongly correlated with the EWC of the polymer as it is the CD during this phase. Overall, HEMA-based hydrogels dehydrate to a greater extent and faster than silicone-hydrogel materials. There are differences in water retention between lenses of similar water content and thickness that should be further investigated.
authors.affiliation: Department of Physics (Optometry), School of Sciences, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal. jgmeijome@fisica.uminho.pt
authors.forename: José M
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: González-Méijome
authors.forename: Antonio
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: López-Alemany
authors.forename: José B
authors.initials: JB
authors.lastname: Almeida
authors.forename: Manuel A
authors.initials: MA
authors.lastname: Parafita
authors.forename: Miguel F
authors.initials: MF
authors.lastname: Refojo
mesh_terms: D003263:Contact Lenses, Hydrophilic; D003681:Dehydration; D020100:Hydrogels / Q000737:chemistry*; D008689:Methacrylates / Q000737:chemistry; D012825:Silicon / Q000737:chemistry*
chemical_list: D020100:Hydrogels; D008689:Methacrylates; C005044:hydroxyethyl methacrylate; D012825:Silicon