Literature DB >> 33662017

Intense pulsed light plus meibomian gland expression versus intense pulsed light alone for meibomian gland dysfunction: A randomized crossover study.

Kyoung Yoon Shin1, Dong Hui Lim2, Chan Hee Moon3, Byung Jin Kim3, Tae-Young Chung2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate the comparative efficacy of intense pulsed light (IPL) therapy alone with that of IPL plus meibomian gland expression (MGX) for meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD).
METHODS: This is a prospective randomized crossover clinical trial. Sixty patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to two groups. All of patients underwent four treatment sessions in total, which were two weeks apart. Group 1 underwent two sessions of IPL therapy with MGX, as well as two sessions of IPL alone. Group 2 received two sessions of IPL therapy alone, and two sessions of IPL therapy with MGX. The following parameters were measured at baseline (BL), 2 weeks after the second treatment session (FU1), and 2 weeks after the fourth treatment session (FU2): tearfilm break-up time (BUT), Oxford grade for corneal staining, meibomian gland expressibility (MGE), meibum quality (MQ), and ocular surface disease index (OSDI). The separate effect of MGX on improvement of MGD parameters was evaluated using generalized estimating equation (GEE).
RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 57.52 ± 10.50 years. The BUT, Oxford grade, MGE, MQ, and OSDI of both groups improved significantly (from baseline) by the end of four treatment sessions (FU2 compared to BL; all p-values <0.05). The MGE and MQ significantly improved after the first and second treatment sessions (FU1 compare to BL; all p-values < 0.001). However, the improvement was not statistically significant after the third and fourth treatment sessions (FU2 compared to FU1; p-value of 0.388 for MGE and 0.645 for MQ in group 1, 0.333 for MGE and 0.333 for MQ in group 2). The IPL plus MGX therapy produced greater improvements in the BUT scores than did IPL therapy alone (p = 0.003 by GEE). In contrast, the Oxford grade, MGE, MQ, and OSDI were not influenced by the addition of MGX to IPL (p = 0.642, 0.663, 0.731, and 0.840, respectively by GEE).
CONCLUSION: IPL therapy effectively improves the subjective symptoms and objective ocular findings of MGD. MGX enhanced the improvement of BUT driven by IPL therapy. The meibomian gland function (MGE and MQ) recovers faster in response to IPL therapy than did the other parameters.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33662017      PMCID: PMC7932142          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246245

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  35 in total

1.  Efficacy and safety of infrared warming of the eyelids.

Authors:  A Mori; Y Oguchi; E Goto; K Nakamori; T Ohtsuki; F Egami; J Shimazaki; K Tsubota
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 2.651

Review 2.  Grading of corneal and conjunctival staining in the context of other dry eye tests.

Authors:  Anthony J Bron; Victoria E Evans; Janine A Smith
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 2.651

3.  Increase in tear film lipid layer thickness following treatment with warm compresses in patients with meibomian gland dysfunction.

Authors:  Mary Catherine Olson; Donald R Korb; Jack V Greiner
Journal:  Eye Contact Lens       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 2.018

Review 4.  The international workshop on meibomian gland dysfunction: executive summary.

Authors:  Kelly K Nichols; Gary N Foulks; Anthony J Bron; Ben J Glasgow; Murat Dogru; Kazuo Tsubota; Michael A Lemp; David A Sullivan
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2011-03-30       Impact factor: 4.799

5.  Intense pulsed light treatment for dry eye disease due to meibomian gland dysfunction; a 3-year retrospective study.

Authors:  Rolando Toyos; William McGill; Dustin Briscoe
Journal:  Photomed Laser Surg       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 2.796

Review 6.  Meibomian Gland Dysfunction: Recent Progress Worldwide and in Japan.

Authors:  Shiro Amano
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 4.799

7.  Ocular evaporation in meibomian gland dysfunction and dry eye.

Authors:  W D Mathers
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 12.079

8.  Tear lipid layer structure and stability following expression of the meibomian glands.

Authors:  J P Craig; K Blades; S Patel
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 9.  IPL technology: a review.

Authors:  Christian Raulin; Bärbel Greve; Hortensia Grema
Journal:  Lasers Surg Med       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 4.025

10.  Multicenter Study of Intense Pulsed Light Therapy for Patients With Refractory Meibomian Gland Dysfunction.

Authors:  Reiko Arita; Takanori Mizoguchi; Shima Fukuoka; Naoyuki Morishige
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 2.651

View more
  4 in total

1.  Intense pulsed light treatment of the upper and lower eyelids in patients with moderate-to-severe meibomian gland dysfunction.

Authors:  Ho Seok Chung; Ye Eun Han; Hun Lee; Jae Yong Kim; Hungwon Tchah
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-07-06       Impact factor: 2.031

2.  Intense pulsed light improves signs and symptoms of dry eye disease due to meibomian gland dysfunction: A randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Rolando Toyos; Neel R Desai; Melissa Toyos; Steven J Dell
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-06-23       Impact factor: 3.752

Review 3.  Eyelid Warming Devices: Safety, Efficacy, and Place in Therapy.

Authors:  Brandon Bzovey; William Ngo
Journal:  Clin Optom (Auckl)       Date:  2022-08-05

4.  Response of tear cytokines following intense pulsed light combined with meibomian gland expression for treating meibomian gland dysfunction-related dry eye.

Authors:  Haozhe Yu; Weizhen Zeng; Gezheng Zhao; Jing Hong; Yun Feng
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-09-15       Impact factor: 6.055

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.