Even though the role of FMs in limiting the SARS-CoV-2 transmission is still a matter of debate, different evidence suggests that their use, particularly in confined environments, may reduce the virus from spreading.
Preliminary studies, however, reported that the use of FMs may harm the ocular surface.
10,11
In a comprehensive interpretation of the results of our study, we found that the continuative use of FMs for 3 months worsened clinical indicators of ocular surface disease (OSD), such as T-BUT and ocular surface staining, and increased cellular and molecular markers of inflammation, such as DCD and HLA-DR, especially in subjects using FMs for more than 6 hours per day. These changes, seen in healthy subjects, were markedly greater in patients with dry eye, where clinical, cellular and molecular markers of OSD were altered even in case of less than 6 hours per day of FM wear.
Thus, the continuative use of FMs may represent a potential risk factor for dry eye in normal cases, whereas is a significant risk factor for ocular surface worsening in patients with DED.
These evidences represent the first described during the COVID-19 pandemic and, thus, cannot be compared with other studies. Nevertheless, when considering the preliminary findings reported by Giannaccare et al., our results seem to confirm the suspect of a potential causative role of FMs in symptoms reported by students during the pandemic.
10 In fact, the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) score was abnormal in more than half of the cases.
In our study, clinical and imaging data were in line between them for the most part. In fact, the FS and LS increase, which may be considered as potential clinical markers of inflammation, were consistent with the DCD and HLA-DR positivity increase, which represent inflammatory markers at IVCM and IC, respectively.
17,19 On the other hand, the unmodified values of GCD after 3 months of FM use was not in line with the T-BUT reduction, which indicates a reduction of the tear film stability as a consequence of mucin loss.
This could depend on two reasons: the first one is that inflammatory modifications of the ocular surface may appear prior to that of GCs in the presence of an OSD form, as previously reported in patients with glaucoma
19; the second is that IVCM, although currently represents the most diffuse to way to study GCs, could not timely recognize the GCD reduction in the presence of a trigger stimulus. Therefore, further studies using IC, which represents the gold standard method to analyze GCs within the conjunctiva, are required.
A crucial point that emerged from our study is the impact of the FM-related changes on the patients’ QOL. As for other parameters, we cannot state whether baseline intergroups differences of DEQS were related to the initial use of FMs. When analyzing the 3 months’ data, the QOL score worsened in patients with DED wearing FMs for at least 3 hours per day, whereas it did not change in healthy subjects. Moreover, DEQS showed strong correlations with DCD and HLA-DR positivity, indicating that the QOL worsening is probably related to the increased ocular surface inflammation.
To our knowledge, there were no previous studies that investigated the relationship between the use of FMs and modifications of the QOL. However, in a recent study that evaluated the effects of surgical and FFP2/N95 FMs on the cardiopulmonary exercise capacity in healthy subjects, the authors concluded that medical masks significantly impair the QOL of wearers.
20
These aspects should be strongly kept in consideration, because patients with DED already have an impaired QOL as a result of the underlying disease. Therefore, medical and behavioral strategies aimed at counterbalance of the detrimental effects of FMs should considered when symptoms and signs of dry eye begin to worse, or prior to their worsening in the presence of a severe form of OSD.
A limited aspect of our study is that we did not consider the impact of other concomitant risk factors for dry eye on the described ocular surface changes, especially the use of video terminals. As known, the lockdown period forced a significant proportion of people to convert their job in smart working, with an increase of the time spent in front of computers.
When considering the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the ocular surface changes, as hypothesized, the airflow reaching the ocular surface during expiration probably represents the trigger factor initiating the cascade of structural and molecular changes of the tear film (TF).
10,11
In fact, the exposure of the ocular surface to high air velocity causes evaporation of water from the precorneal TF by eliminating the boundary of air adjacent to the TF in conditions of stagnant ambient air. This hypothesis was confirmed in previous studies that reported that exposure of the TF to high velocity airflow (1.0–1.4 m/s) on normal eyes significantly decreases BUT, and increases blink frequency as a result of the changes on the ocular surface.
21,22 These findings were more recently confirmed in an anterior segment-optical coherence tomography study, which found that the exposure of the ocular surface to high speed air flow (1.5 m/s) reduces the lower tear meniscus height and area and increases the blink frequency.
23 Therefore, airflow reduces the TF stability and the tear volume, inducing dry eye-like alterations; these findings are in line with the reduced T-BUT and STI values we observed especially in subjects with DED.
HLA-DR is a marker of inflammatory activity on the ocular surface, both at the corneal and conjunctival level, as it reflects the expression of DCs. It is widely demonstrated that in case of DED, there is a pro-inflammatory cellular activation with increased DC density.
17,24,25 HLA-DR was found increased in DED, Sjögren syndrome, and meibomian gland disease. In addition, the HLA-DR marker was described in literature to be useful for monitoring anti-inflammatory effects of treatments in DED.
24
The present study suffers from some limitations. First, we did not consider control groups of patients with DED and healthy subjects not using FMs, because in our country the entire population is strongly invited to wear FMs. Therefore, one cannot ascertain whether observed modifications in DED are induced by the use of FMs or represent a normal worsening of the ocular surface related to the concomitant disease. However, the DCD and HLA-DR increases also in healthy subjects, which do not have an underlying OSD, and the worse values observed in subjects using FMs for more than 6 hours/day seem to highlight the potential causative role of the FM use in the ocular surface worsening. Second, we exclusively investigated the impact of surgical FMs on ocular surface, because the largest part of the population wears this type of PPE; further prospective studies are required to evaluate the impact of most protective FMs, such as FFP2 or FFP3, because they could differently harm the ocular surface. Third, this a short-term prospective study, which, for this reason, cannot unravel the ocular surface changes in full; in fact, it is at least hypothesizable that long-term studies may reveal also FM-related GCD changes. In addition, prospective studies with a longer follow-up and a period of FM wear discontinuation could also unravel whether these changes are reversible at the suspension of FMs, and in which time the ocular surface may recover its initial status. Finally, to avoid potential biases in the final results, we did not enroll patients on VDT-related smart working; considering that the use of PPE and the remodulation of job activities will still continue for several months, further studies analyzing the impact of VDT activities and FM use in the ocular surface modifications are mandatory.
In conclusion, our study found that: (i) the regular daily use of FMs harms the ocular surface in the presence of dry eye, inducing a significant worsening of several clinical and molecular parameters when the use is prolonged during the day; (ii) the ocular surface worsening has a significant negative impact on the patient quality of life; (iii) more limited is the detrimental effects of FMs in the presence of healthy ocular surface, even though they tend to become significant when the number of daily hours increases; and (iv) the increase of inflammation appears as the main molecular mechanisms underlying all these aspects. Therefore, FM users should pay attention in the presence of a concomitant ocular surface disorder, such as dry eye. In this case, a modification of environmental factors along with modulations of drug strategies should be strongly considered to increase the FM tolerability and limit the OSD worsening.