PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

Amniotic membrane extract does not speed corneal ulcer healing in cats

By Silveira, Bruna Carvalho et al.·Published in Veterinary ophthalmology·2023·Faculdade de Medicina Veterin&#xe1, Brazil·View original on PubMed

PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →

Original publication title: Effects of commercial amniotic membrane extract on the re-epithelialization time and the early expression of matrix metalloproteinase-9 in cats with experimentally induced corneal ulcers.

Species:
cat

Plain-English summary

A group of 16 cats with corneal ulcers were treated with either a commercial amniotic membrane extract (EyeQ) or saline to see if it would help their eyes heal faster. Unfortunately, the study found that there was no significant difference in healing time or the levels of a specific protein (MMP-9) in their tears between the two groups. Both treatments resulted in healing without scarring or other complications. While the amniotic membrane extract was safe to use, it did not speed up the healing process for these cats.

People also search for: cat corneal ulcer treatment · EyeQ amniotic membrane extract for cats · cat eye healing time

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether a commercially available amniotic membrane extract (AME) can accelerate corneal wound healing and suppress the early expression of MMP-9 in the tears of cats with experimentally induced superficial ulcerative keratitis. PROCEDURES: A total number of 16 cats were included. At the end of keratectomy, cats in the treatment group (TG, n = 8) received 40 μl of AME (EyeQ® Amniotic Eye Drops, Vetrix®) four times daily, while cats in the control group (CG, n = 8) received 40 μl of saline at the same time points. Tears were collected 24 and 48 h after keratectomy, and the total MMP-9 was quantified by ELISA. RESULTS: The corneal re-epithelialization rate did not differ between groups (p = .26), being 0.48 ± 0.05 mm/h in the CG and 0.41 ± 0.03 mm/h in the TG. Similarly, the average time to achieve corneal wound healing did not differ between groups (p = .25) and was 61.50 ± 3.54 h in the CG and 70.50 ± 6.71 h in the TG. The dimensions of the ulcerated areas also did not differ at any time point between the groups (p > .05). In both groups, corneas healed without scarring, pigmentation, or vascularization. The expression of MMP-9 in the tears was similar in both groups at 24 h post-keratectomy, with a slight decrease at 48 h (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: The instillation of a commercial AME (EyeQ®) is safe, but it did not decrease the corneal re-epithelialization time or the early expression of MMP-9 in the tears of cats with experimentally induced superficial ulcerative keratitis in this study.

Find similar cases for your pet

PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.

Search related cases →

Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36094319/