RESUMO
PURPOSE: This study aimed to quantify the amount of silicone oil (SO) released across a variety of syringe and needle models routinely used for intravitreal injection. METHODS: The release of SO was assessed in eight models of syringes, two of which were reported to be 'SO-free', and eleven models of needles with unknown SO content. To evaluate SO release within the context of anti-VEGF therapeutics, syringes were evaluated using aflibercept, bevacizumab, buffer, ziv-aflibercept and formulation buffer. All syringe tests were performed with or without agitation by flicking for syringes. Needles were evaluated without agitation only. Samples were fluorescently labelled to identify SO, and triplicate measurements were collected using imaging flow cytometry. RESULTS: Seven out of 8 syringe models showed a statistically significant increase in the SO particle count after agitation. The two SO-free syringe models (HSW Norm-Ject, Daikyo Crystal Zenith) released the least SO particles, with or without agitation, whereas the BD Ultra-Fine and Saldanha-Rodrigues syringes released the most. More SO was released when the syringes were prefilled with formulation buffer than with ziv-aflibercept. Syringes filled with aflibercept and bevacizumab had intermediate levels. Agitation increased the release of SO into each of the drug solutions. Silicone oil (SO) was detected in all needles. CONCLUSIONS: Agitation of the syringe by flicking leads to a substantial increase in the number of SO particles. Silicone oil (SO)-free syringes had the best performance, but physicians must also be aware that needles are siliconized and also contribute to the injection of SO into the vitreous.
Assuntos
Inibidores da Angiogênese/química , Injeções Intravítreas/instrumentação , Agulhas , Silício/análise , Óleos de Silicone/análise , Seringas , Inibidores da Angiogênese/administração & dosagem , Desenho de Equipamento , Humanos , Doenças Retinianas/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
Previous studies have reported silicone oil (SO) applied to needles and syringes in the vitreous of patients after intravitreal injections. We evaluated four syringes (SR 1-mL insulin, Saldanha-Rodrigues; BD 1-mL Tuberculin Slip Tip, Becton-Dickinson; BD Ultra-Fine 0.3 mL, HSW Norm-Ject Tuberculin, Henke Sass Wolf) and 10 needles (BD PrecisionGlide 27- and 30-gauge (G); BD Eclipse and JBP Nanoneedle 27-, 30-, 33- and 34-G; TSK Invisible Needle and 27 and 30-G Steriject Control Hub). The protein-free buffer samples injected into the syringes and needles under study were collected in an Eppendorf tube and taken to Flow imaging microscopy, that characterized the concentration and morphology of the microsized particles. The number of particles was analyzed. The coefficients of variation (CV) were the primary outcome. The Feltz and Miller test compared the CVs. The significance level was 5%. Numerous particles and high CVs were associated with both devices, needles and syringes; the comparisons among them did not reach significance. The BD Ultrafine 0.3 mL syringe (149.7%) had the highest CV and the SO-free HSW Norm-Ject (66.4%) syringe the lowest, and the TSK Invisible needle (149.5%) had the highest and the BD Precision Glide 30G needle (35.9%) needle the lowest. In conclusion, particle release, including those with SO morphology, varied greatly among instruments, even from the same lots, which is relevant considering that fewer particles are injected into some eyes compared with others.