<strong>ARVO</strong> 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts by Scientific Section/Group - <strong>Cornea</strong>lenses, sufficient time must be allowed for the lens to reach a stableposition before assessing the depth of the post-lens fluid reservoir. Ifa lens fit is assessed prematurely, the subsequent lens settling couldgreatly reduce reservoir volume and increase contact with the cornea,and this would limit the value of using these lenses in patients withsevere ocular surface disease.Commercial Relationships: Cherie B. Nau, None; MurielSchornack, NoneSupport: Research to Prevent Blindness and Mayo FoundationProgram Number: 5470 Poster Board Number: A0169Presentation Time: 8:30 AM - 10:15 AMMultivariate Statistical Analysis Examining and Modeling DrugRelease from Contact Lens MaterialsFrances Lasowski, Giuliano Guidi, Heather Sheardown. ChemicalEngineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.Purpose: Topical administration of eye drops remains the mostprevalent method of delivering drugs to the eye. However significantloss and potential systemic side effects necessitates a more effectivedrug delivery method. Contact lenses represent an attractive option asan alternative vehicle for wide range of therapeutics. Namely, the useof a model contact lens delivery system for the ocular drugs timololmaleate, roscovitine and atropine were investigated. The effects ofdrug loading, material composition and presence of wetting agentswere analyzed to further understand the drug-hydrogel interactionsthat govern release kinetics and critical material properties. However,due to the complex nature of these interactions, single variableanalysis of the data is insufficient to predict of future trends.Methods: Model lens materials were based on combinations ofdimethylacrylamide (DMA), hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA)and methacryloxypropyltris(trimethylsiloxy)silane (TRIS). Thematerials were prepared with and without roscovitine (0.5 wt%),timolol maleate (0.5 wt%) and atropine (0.5 wt% & 1.5 wt%). Otherscontained hyaluronic acid at 0.1 wt%. Release studies wereperformed into PBS solutions using UV- spectroscopy and HPLC toquantify release of each drug. Swelling, extraction and contact anglestudies were done to characterize the materials. This information wascompiled and inputted into ProMV, a multivariate analysis toolprovided by Prosensus, Inc. This allowed for examination by bothPCA (principle component analysis) and PLS (projection to latentstructures).Results: Single variable analysis trends include greater total drugrelease from HEMA/TRIS materials than DMA/TRIS materials,greater release of timolol and atropine than roscovitine, and greaterrelease with HA present. The figure shows sample release kineticsfrom various materials at different drug loadings. Despite thesetrends, it is difficult to see trends bridging all drug loadings andmaterial compositions. With multivariate analysis, it is possible to seethe design space and predict compositions and drugs that yield thepreferred release kinetics and properties.Conclusions: Contact lenses provide a feasible method to deliver avariety of drugs to various ocular tissues. The use of multivariatestatistical analysis provides better modeling and creates a predictivemodel allowing optimization of future materials.Commercial Relationships: Frances Lasowski, None; GiulianoGuidi, None; Heather Sheardown, Alcon (F), Alimera Sciences (F)Support: NSERC 20/20 Ophthalmic Materials NetworkProgram Number: 5471 Poster Board Number: A0170Presentation Time: 8:30 AM - 10:15 AMA study of the feasibility of fitting custom designed contact lensesto guinea pigs, guided by AS-OCT imaging and cornealtopographyYue Liu 1 , Zhi Chen 2 , Christine F. Wildsoet 1 . 1 VIsion Science, Univ ofCA, Berkeley Sch of Optometry, Berkeley, CA; 2 Department ofOphthalmology & Vision Science, Eye & ENT hospital,FudanUniversity, Shanghai, China.Purpose: To examine the efficacy and reliability of anterior segmentOCT (AS-OCT) in guiding specialty contact lens (CL) fitting inguinea pig eyes. Small-scale clinical studies suggesting thatorthokeratology (Ortho-K) is effective in controlling myopiaprogression motivated this study, with our longer term goal being touse the myopic guinea pig model to better understand the mechanismunderlying myopia retardation with Ortho-K.Methods: Six guinea pigs underwent unilateral Ortho-K fitting withtheir contralateral eyes serving as controls. <strong>Cornea</strong>l topography,refraction, biometric axial ocular parameters were assessed to aid inthe design of the Ortho-K lenses; measurements were made everyday, starting on the day of initial lens fitting until the cornealreshaping effect has stabilized. The anterior segment was assessedwith and without fluorescein staining by slit lamp biomicroscopy andphotographically recorded; AS-OCT imaging was used to monitorcorneal integrity, CL stability, and the progress of corneal reshaping.Results: On average, extended wear (EW) Ortho-K lenses couldinduce more than 6 diopters of central corneal flattening andcorresponding paracentral steepening without significantly affectingcorneal integrity and/or the stability of the lens fitting. There was lesscorneal fluorescein staining in the eyes with EW Ortho-K lenses,comparing to the non-lens wearing eye. AS-OCT imagingsignificantly reduced the frequency of lens reordering.Conclusions: The combination of AS-OCT imaging and cornealtopography provided the essential information for designing andfitting Ortho-K lenses to this animal model. The EW OrthoKmodality applied to guinea pig eyes allows for corneal reshapingsimilar to its clinical application. Further study of Ortho-K in thisapplication may yield important insight into the mechanismunderlying its myopia control effect.Commercial Relationships: Yue Liu, Coopervision (F); Zhi Chen,None; Christine F. Wildsoet, NoneSupport: NIH R01 EY12392, UC-Coopervision Discovery GrantProgram Number: 5472 Poster Board Number: A0171Presentation Time: 8:30 AM - 10:15 AMInvestigation of Latanoprost Release from Contact LensMaterials Using in vitro Cell Models©2013, Copyright by the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc., all rights reserved. Go to iovs.org to access the version of record. For permissionto reproduce any abstract, contact the <strong>ARVO</strong> Office at arvo@arvo.org.
<strong>ARVO</strong> 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts by Scientific Section/Group - <strong>Cornea</strong>Saman Mohammadi 1 , Lyndon W. Jones 2, 3 , Maud Gorbet 1, 3 . 1 SystemsDesign Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada;2 School of Optometry, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON,Canada; 3 Centre for Contact Lens Research, University of Waterloo,Waterloo, ON, Canada.Purpose: Drug delivering contact lenses (CL) may enhance bothdrug delivery efficacy and patient compliance with the drug regimen.Although in vivo studies are required to prove efficacy, in vitrocorneal models can prove valuable to compare release profiles andidentify the most promising candidates for in vivo studies. This studyinvestigated the uptake and delivery of Latanoprost by commerciallyavailable CL using three differing in vitro cell models.Methods: The in vitro models used diffusion through a polyethyleneterephthalate (PET) filter only (no cells), a PET filter with amonolayer of human corneal epithelial cells (HCECs) and a PETfilter with stratified HCECs, all submerged in keratinocyte serumfreemedium. Four CL materials (balafilcon A; galyfilcon A;senofilcon A; omafilcon A), were soaked for 24hrs in one of the twoforms of a glaucoma drug, Latanoprost (50 μg/ml) and LatanoprostFree-Acid (50 μg/ml). The lenses were then placed on the variousmodels (n=3) and diffusion of the drug through the models wasmeasured after 1, 3, 6 and 24 hours. To compare release profiles withserum-free medium, a drug release in phosphate buffered saline(PBS) with the “no cell” model was performed over 24hrs.Results: Over a 24hr period, drug release in PBS was notsignificantly different from serum-free medium- However, the releasein presence of cells was higher (e.g., for galyfilcon A, latanoprostrelease in presence of cells was significantly different from no cellsmodel, p=0.014). Similar differences were observed for other contactlens types except for the conventional hydrogel omafilcon A. Forboth drugs, similar release profiles were observed for monolayer andstratified cell culture models. In contrast, the latanoprost free-acidrelease in the no-cell model was higher (p=0.038) due to highersolubility of the free acid form of the drug in medium. In a monolayermodel with paraformaldehyde-treated cells, a release similar to nocells model was observed, further highlighting the importance ofmetabolically active cells.Conclusions: Latanoprost is a lipophilic prodrug in which the esterbond in the α-chain can be metabolized by cells into an alcohol andthe latanoprost free-acid (active drug) to increase bioavailability. Ourresults highlight the importance that in vitro experimental models andthe presence of cells may have on determining the release profile of adrug delivery material.Commercial Relationships: Saman Mohammadi, None; LyndonW. Jones, Alcon (F), Alcon (R), Allergan (F), Abbott Medical Optics(R), Bausch & Lomb (R), Ciba Vision (F), Ciba Vision (R),CooperVision (F), Johnson & Johnson (F), Johnson & Johnson (R);Maud Gorbet, CIBA Vision/Alcon (F)Support: CHRP (collaborative program between NSERC and CIHR)Program Number: 5473 Poster Board Number: A0172Presentation Time: 8:30 AM - 10:15 AMOcular Signs and Symptoms in Contact Lens Wearers in aControlled Low Humidity Environmental Exposure Chamber(LH-EEC), A Natural Provocation Research ModelPiyush Patel 1 , Fiona Soong 1 , Jalaiah P. Varikooty 2 , Nancy J. Keir 2 ,Lyndon W. Jones 2 . 1 Inflamax Research, Mississauga, ON, Canada;2 CCLR, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.Purpose: To evaluate the effects of contact lens (CL) wear on theocular surface under controlled conditions of low humidity andairflow, to assess the validity of a natural provocation research modelfor the study of dry eye and contact lenses.Methods: The LH-EEC is validated to maintain uniform low relativehumidity (10±3%) and comfortable room temperatures which mimicnatural arid outdoor/indoor environs. Ten symptomatic CL wearersdiscontinued CL wear and used Refresh PLUS® tears t.i.d for 48hrsprior to LH-EEC Visit. Upon return to the clinic, subjects wererandomly fit with 1-day Acuvue® Moist® (etafilcon A): CLA in oneeye and 1-Day Acuvue® TruEye (narafilcon A): CLB in thecontralateral eye. They were then exposed to LH-EEC for 180 minswith visual tasking throughout. Total Ocular Symptom Scores(TOSS) (dryness+grittiness+burning/stinging+itchiness) were rated0-4 (maximum score of 16) at entry and at set intervals within theEEC. Tear Break Up Time (TBUT), fluorescein corneal staining andlissamine green conjunctival staining were collected pre and post LH-EEC using Efron scale (0-4) on the NEI grid for the cornea and nasal& temporal conjunctival zones.Results: After 180 mins in LH-EEC, mean increase from baselinewas CLA=+1.4±1.2 and CLB=+1.0±0.7 for corneal staining andCLA=+1.30±0.78 and CLB=+1.20±0.72 for conjunctival staining.The mean reduction in TBUT (secs) was CLA=-0.3±0.2 and CLB=-0.8±0.7. Symptoms escalated throughout the exposure period withTOSS increasing from baseline for both lenses (CLA=+2.4±1.7 andCLB of +3.30±1.16), with the mean change for CLB beingsignificant (p=0.02). Similarly, the dryness symptom score showed atrend to increase for CLA (+1.1±0.5) and a significant increase(p=0.001) for CLB (+1.40±0.31).Conclusions: The LH-EEC Contact Lens Dry Eye model exacerbatesocular symptoms and signs while controlling all environmentalvariables. After only 180 mins of exposure, signs indicative of ocularsurface desiccation and a parallel increase in dry eye symptoms weremeasurable. The LH-EEC model provides a valuable clinical researchoption for the study of CL and dry eye which provides rapidsymptoms and signs typically found in longer periods of in-eye wearoutside the LH-EEC.Commercial Relationships: Piyush Patel, Inflamax Research (E);Fiona Soong, Inflamax Research (C); Jalaiah P. Varikooty, Alcon(F); Nancy J. Keir, TearScience (F), Alcon (F), Alcon (R), Allergan(F), Johnson & Johnson (F), CooperVision (F), Visioneering, Inc.(F); Lyndon W. Jones, Alcon (F), Alcon (R), Allergan (F), AbbottMedical Optics (R), Bausch & Lomb (R), Ciba Vision (F), CibaVision (R), CooperVision (F), Johnson & Johnson (F), Johnson &Johnson (R)Program Number: 5474 Poster Board Number: A0173Presentation Time: 8:30 AM - 10:15 AMCorrection of infant aphakia after cataract surgery with rigidgas-permeable contact lensesAnja K. Gruenert 1 , Michael Klueppel 3 , Juergen Hausser 4 , ThomasReinhard 2 , Rainer Sundmacher 1 , Tanja Guthoff 1 , Thomas A.Fuchsluger 1 , Gerd Geerling 1 . 1 Department of Ophthalmology,Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; 2 Department ofOphthalmology, University of Freiburg Hospital, Freiburg, Germany;3 Practice, Moers, Germany; 4 Practice, Duesseldorf, Germany.Purpose: To evaluate the visual outcome of aphakic infants treatedwith rigid gas permeable contact lenses following surgery ofcongenital cataract. Furthermore to investigate the safety andviability of rigid contact lens correction in children.Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of infants whounderwent cataract surgery and were subsequently treated with rigidgas permeable contact lenses between 1987 and 2011 (n=75). Theinfants were divided into four prognostic groups: bilateral aphakia(Group I), monolateral aphakia with early (Group II) or late (GroupIII) surgery and aphakia with additional ocular pathologies (GroupIV). The outcome was evaluated in terms of visual acuity, refractivepower, keratometric astigmatism, compliance with the wear of the©2013, Copyright by the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc., all rights reserved. Go to iovs.org to access the version of record. For permissionto reproduce any abstract, contact the <strong>ARVO</strong> Office at arvo@arvo.org.
- Page 2 and 3:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 4 and 5:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 6 and 7:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 8 and 9:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 10:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 13 and 14:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 16 and 17:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 18 and 19:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 20 and 21:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 22 and 23:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 24 and 25:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 26 and 27:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 28 and 29:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 30 and 31:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 32 and 33:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 34 and 35:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 36 and 37:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 38 and 39:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 40 and 41:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 42 and 43:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 44 and 45:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 46 and 47:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 48 and 49:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 50 and 51:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 52 and 53:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 54 and 55:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 56 and 57:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 58 and 59:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 60 and 61:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 62 and 63:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 64 and 65:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 66 and 67:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 68 and 69:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 70 and 71:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 72 and 73:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 74 and 75:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 76 and 77:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 78 and 79:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 80 and 81:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 82 and 83:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 84 and 85:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 86 and 87:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 88 and 89:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 90 and 91:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 92 and 93:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 94 and 95:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 96 and 97:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 98 and 99:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 100 and 101:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 102 and 103:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 104 and 105:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 106 and 107:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 108 and 109:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 110 and 111:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 112 and 113:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 114 and 115:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 116 and 117:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 118 and 119:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 120 and 121:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 122 and 123:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 124 and 125:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 126 and 127:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 128 and 129:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 130 and 131:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 132 and 133:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 134 and 135:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 136 and 137:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 138 and 139:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 140 and 141:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 142 and 143:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 144 and 145:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 146 and 147:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 148 and 149:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 150 and 151:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 152 and 153:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 154 and 155:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 156 and 157:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 158 and 159:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 160 and 161:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 162 and 163:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 164 and 165:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 166 and 167:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 168 and 169:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 170 and 171:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 172 and 173:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 174 and 175:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 176 and 177:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 178 and 179:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 180 and 181:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 182 and 183:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 184 and 185:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 186 and 187:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 188 and 189:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 190 and 191:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 192 and 193:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 194 and 195:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 196 and 197:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 198 and 199:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 200 and 201:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 202 and 203:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 204 and 205:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 206 and 207:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 208 and 209:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 210 and 211:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 212 and 213:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 214 and 215:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 216 and 217:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 218 and 219:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 220 and 221:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 222 and 223:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 224 and 225:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 226 and 227:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 228 and 229:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 230 and 231:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 232 and 233:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 234 and 235:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 236 and 237:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 238 and 239:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 240 and 241:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 242 and 243:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 244 and 245:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 246 and 247:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 248 and 249:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 250 and 251:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 252 and 253:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 254 and 255:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 256 and 257:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 258 and 259:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 260 and 261:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 262 and 263:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 264 and 265:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 266 and 267:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 268 and 269:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 270 and 271:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 272 and 273:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 274 and 275:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 276 and 277:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 278 and 279:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 280 and 281:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 282 and 283:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 284 and 285:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 286 and 287:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 288 and 289:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 290 and 291:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 292 and 293:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 294 and 295:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 296 and 297:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 298 and 299:
ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 300 and 301: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 302 and 303: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 304 and 305: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 306 and 307: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 308 and 309: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 310 and 311: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 312 and 313: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 314 and 315: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 316 and 317: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 318 and 319: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 320 and 321: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 322 and 323: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 324 and 325: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 326 and 327: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 328 and 329: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 330 and 331: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 332 and 333: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 334 and 335: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 336 and 337: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 338 and 339: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 340 and 341: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 342 and 343: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 344 and 345: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 346 and 347: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 348 and 349: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 352 and 353: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 354 and 355: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 356 and 357: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 358 and 359: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 360 and 361: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 362 and 363: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 364 and 365: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 366 and 367: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 368 and 369: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 370 and 371: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 372 and 373: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 374 and 375: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 376 and 377: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 378 and 379: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 380 and 381: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts
- Page 382 and 383: ARVO 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts