| Literature DB >> 32188437 |
Jinling Ge1, Na Liu1, Xiaoming Wang1, Ying Du1, Chaoqing Wang1, Zhaorui Li1, Jing Li1, Lihua Wang2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of M22 Optimal Pulsed Technology (OPT) applied in patients with age-related cataract and Meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) in perioperative period.Entities:
Keywords: Age-related cataract; Dry eye; Meibomian gland dysfunction; OPT treatment; Phacoemulsification
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32188437 PMCID: PMC7081679 DOI: 10.1186/s12886-020-01357-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Ophthalmol ISSN: 1471-2415 Impact factor: 2.209
The graduation standard of MGD
| Degree | Symptoms | Palpebral margin changes | Secretion character score | Secretion discharge capacity score | Meibomian gland deletion score | Corneal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mild | Slight, intermittent | Normal or mild hyperemia of palpebral margin and there may be fat cap formation | 1 | 1 | 1 | Normal, no epithelial damage |
| Moderate | Mild or moderate, persistent | palpebral margin becomes blunt, round and thickened. Meibomian gland mouth was obstruction and protuberance | 2 | 2 | 2 | Mild or moderate epithelial damage, located at the periphery |
| Severe | Moderate or severe, affecting life or work | The blepharon margin is thickened and the neovascularization is obvious. Fat thrombus formation in meibomian gland mouth | 3 | 3 | 3 | Damage to epithelium and superficial matrix |
Comparison of dry eye symptoms and ocular surface parameters in the Conventional surgery group before and after surgery
| Parameters | baseline | 1 month | 3 month | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| baseline vs | baseline vs | 1 month vs | ||||
| OSDIa | 31.19 ± 7.28 | 33.43 ± 6.32 | 30.51 ± 6.65 | 0.003* | 0.256 | 0.001# |
| EMASb | 1.00 (1.00, 2.00) | 1.00 (1.00, 2.00) | 1.00 (1.00, 2.00) | 0.109 | 0.334 | 0.763 |
| MGYSSb | 1.00 (1.00, 1.00) | 1.00 (1.00, 2.00) | 1.00 (1.00, 2.00) | 0.088 | 0.002* | 0.376 |
| CFSb | 0.00 (0.00, 1.00) | 1.00 (0.50, 1.00) | 0.00 (0.00, 1.00) | 0.074 | 0.008* | 0.564 |
| TMHa/mm | 0.18 ± 0.03 | 0.20 ± 0.02 | 0.20 ± 0.02 | 0.016* | 0.020* | 0.635 |
| NITBUTa/s | 5.52 ± 1.95 | 5.06 ± 1.54 | 4.99 ± 1.24 | 0.002* | 0.035* | 0.764 |
| MGLSb | 1.00 (1.00, 2.00) | 1.00 (1.00, 1.50) | 1.00 (1.00, 2.00) | 0.564 | 0.655 | 0.157 |
OSDI Ocular Surface Disease Index, MGYSS Meibomian gland yielding secretion score, CFS corneal fluorescein staining, TMH tear meniscus height, EMAS Eyelid margin abnormality score, MGLS meibomian gland loss score, TBUS tear film break-up time. a: Normal distribution data, the mean is expressed as Mean ± SD, and the paired sample t test is used for comparison between groups. b: Non-normally distributed data, the mean is represented by Median (P25, P75), and the comparison between groups is based on paired sample nonparametric Wilcoxon test. *p < 0.05 vs Baseline; #p < 0.05 vs 1 month
Comparison of dry eye symptoms and ocular surface parameters in the OPT treatment group before and after surgery in patients
| parameters | baseline | 1 month | 3 month | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| baseline vs 1 month | baseline vs 3 month | 1 month vs 3 month | ||||
| OSDIa | 31.39 ± 8.57 | 28.10 ± 5.88 | 21.58 ± 4.97 | 0.027* | 0.000* | 0.000# |
| EMASb | 1.00 (1.00, 2.00) | 1.00 (0.00, 1.25) | 1.00 (0.00, 1.00) | 0.020* | 0.025* | 0.739 |
| MGYSSb | 1.00 (1.00, 1.00) | 1.00 (1.00, 1.00) | 1.00 (0.00, 1.00) | 0.414 | 0.020* | 0.467 |
| CFSb | 0.00 (0.00, 1.00) | 0.00 (0.00, 1.00) | 0.00 (0.00, 1.00) | 0.577 | 0.589 | 1.000 |
| TMHa/mm | 0.18 ± 0.31 | 0.19 ± 0.03 | 0.19 ± 0.02 | 0.210 | 0.147 | 0.611 |
| NITBUTa/s | 4.98 ± 1.84 | 5.67 ± 1.80 | 5.87 ± 1.17 | 0.091 | 0.026* | 0.550 |
| MGLSb | 1.00 (1.00, 2.00) | 1.00 (1.00, 2.00) | 1.00 (1.00, 1.00) | 0.083 | 0.002* | 0.008# |
OSDI Ocular Surface Disease Index, MGYSS Meibomian gland yielding secretion score, CFS corneal fluorescein staining, TMH tear meniscus height, EMAS Eyelid margin abnormality score, MGLS meibomian gland loss score, TBUS tear film break-up time. a: Normal distribution data, the mean is expressed as Mean ± SD, and the paired sample t test is used for comparison between groups. b: Non-normally distributed data, the mean is represented by Median (P25, P75), and the comparison between groups is based on paired sample nonparametric Wilcoxon test. *p < 0.05 vs Baseline; #p < 0.05 vs 1 month
Fig. 1Meibography images. a Meibography image (100 × magnification) before OPT treatment. b Meibography image (100 × magnification) after OPT treatment. Compared the image before surgery, the MG structure of some patients was clear, and the loss rate was lower after OPT treatment
Comparison of postoperative ocular surface parameters between OPT treatment group and Conventional operation group
| parameters | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| baseline | 1 month | 3 month | |
| Agea | 0.966 | ||
| OSDIa | 0.931 | 0.005* | 0.000* |
| EMASb | 0.543 | 0.060 | 0.033* |
| MGYSSb | 0.657 | 0.004* | 0.001* |
| CFSb | 0.716 | 0.006* | 0.800 |
| TMHa/mm | 0.416 | 0.189 | 0.110 |
| NITBUTa/s | 0.295 | 0.209 | 0.033* |
| MGLSb | 0.544 | 0.989 | 0.005* |
OSDI Ocular Surface Disease Index, MGYSS Meibomian gland yielding secretion score, CFS corneal fluorescein staining, TMH tear meniscus height, EMAS Eyelid margin abnormality score, MGLS meibomian gland loss score, TBUS tear film break-up time. a: Normal distribution data, the mean is expressed as Mean ± SD, and the paired sample t test is used for comparison between groups. b: Non-normally distributed data, the mean is represented by Median (P25, P75), and the comparison between groups is based on paired sample nonparametric Wilcoxon test. *p < 0.05 vs Baseline; #p < 0.05: conventional operation group vs OPT treatment group
Fig. 2Changes in DE symptom and ocular surface parameters in the OPT treatment group and the conventional surgery group. a OSDI. b EMAS. c TBUT. d MGYSS. e MGLS. f CFS. *p < 0.05 vs the conventional surgery group