DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20151449

Study of conjunctival impression cytology in assessing goblet cell density in dry eyes

T. S. K. Gautam, M. Vasundhara, P. Viswamithra, A. Bhagya Lakshmi

Abstract


Background: Dry eye is a chronic multi-factorial condition characterized by disturbances in the tear film and ocular surface with a decrease in goblet cells which can be assessed by conjunctival impression cytology (CIC) which is as effective as biopsy for diagnostic purposes. It helps establish not only the diagnosis of dry eye but also aids in grading the severity. This is a highly sensitive method to detect pathological changes in the conjunctival surface and confirm the clinical diagnosis. The aim of the study was to determine the goblet cell density by impression cytology, grading the severity of dry eyes and comparing the study with other studies.

Methods: Study was conducted for a period of 2 yrs from August 2011 to July 2013 in 80 patients above 20 yrs age with clinically established diagnosis of dry eye who were subjected to conjunctival imprint cytology and stained with PAS to estimate he goblet cell density.

Results: Out of the 80 cases of dry eye studied 45 were females and 35 were males with a female to male ratio of 1.28: 1 with a slight female preponderance. Age of the patients ranged from 21yrso 73 yrs. CIC showed positivity in 43 cases (53.75%) and negative in 37 cases (46.25%). 39 cases (90.70%) of positive CIC were above the age of 40 years.

Conclusions: Dry eyes were found to be more common in age group above 40yrs with slight female preponderance. CIC showed decreased goblet cell density with increasing age in clinically diagnosed dry eyes.


Keywords


Dry eye, Impression cytology, Goblet cell density

Full Text:

PDF

References


Djalilian AR, Hamrah P, Pflugfelder SC. Dry eye. In: Krachmer JH, Mannis MJ, Holland EJ, editors.Cornea. 2nd ed. Philadelphia. Elsevier Mosby; 2005.

Guazzi A, Nizzoli R, Tomba MC. Value of the filter imprint technique in the cytological study of ocular lesions. ActaCytol. 1988;37:601-3

Nelson JD, Havener VR, Cameron JD. Cellulose acetate impressions of the ocular surface.Dry eye states.Arch Ophthalmo. 1983;101:1869-72.

Dry Eye Workshop. The definition and classification of dry eye disease: report of the definition and classification subcommittee of the International Dry Eye Workshop. Ocul Surf. 2007;5(2):75-92.

Hashemi H, Khabazkhoob M, Kheirkhah A, Emamian MH, Mehravaran S, Shariati M. Prevalence of dry eye syndrome in an adult population. Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology. 2014;42:242-8.

Reddy M, Reddy RP, Reddy SC. Conjunctival impression cytology in dry eye states. Ind J Opthalmol. 1991;39(1):22-4.

Shrestha E, Shrestha JK, Shayami G, Chaudhary M. Conjunctival impression cytology in dry eye syndrome. Nepal J Ophthalmol. 2011;3(5):39-44.

Mathers WD, Lane JA, Zimmerman MB. Tear film changes associated with normal aging. Cornea. 1996;15:229-34.

Hom MM, Martinson JR, Knapp LL, Paugh JR. Prevalence of Meibomian gland dysfunction. Optom Vis Sci. 1990;67:710-2.

Norn MS. Tear secretion in normal eyes. Estimated by a new method: the lacrimal streak dilution test.ActaOphthalmol (Copenh). 1965;43:567-73.

Srinivasan S, Joyce E, Jones LW. Tear osmolality and ferning patterns in postmenopausal women. Optom Vis Sci. 2007;84:588-92.

Sullivan BD, Evans JE, Dana MR, Sullivan DA. Influence of ag. Schaumberg DA, Buring JE, Sullivan DA, Dana MR. Hormone replacement therapy and dry eye syndrome. Jama. 2001;286:2114-9.

Schaumberg DA, Sullivan DA, Buring JE, Dana MR. Prevalence of dry eye syndrome among US women. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003;136:318-26.

Pushpavarma. Conjunctival impression cytology. All India Ophthal Conf. 2005:577-8.

Gadkari SS, Adrianwala SD, Prayag AS, Khilnani P, Mehta NJ, Shaha NA. Conjunctival impression cytology--a study of normal conjunctiva. J Postgrad Med. 1992;38:21-3,22A.