Christoph Laufenböck1. 1. , Färbergasse 13, Haus A, 6850, Dornbirn, Österreich. christoph.laufenboeck@gmx.at.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Thermal pulsation (LipiFlow®, Johnson&Johnson, Santa Ana, CA, USA) has been advocated for meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) treatment and was found to be useful in many studies. The aim of this study was to show the efficacy of the method and to compare it to a daily eyelid margin massage in a non-university institution. METHODS: A non-blinded, single-center interventional study comparing thermal pulsation with eyelid margin massage for the treatment of MDD. In this study 30 patients were recruited during daily office hours. Symptoms (OSDI) and ocular surface (NIK-BUT, tear ferning test, tear meniscus height, LIPCO folds, meibography, meibomian gland evaluator) were assessed before treatment. A total of 15 patients (9 women) underwent thermal pulsation (single session), while 15 patients (8 women) performed eyelid margin massage (once daily) as instructed for 3 months. RESULTS: Before the two treatment methods, there were no differences in the above parameters, gender and age were also normally distributed. After treatment, both subjective and objective criteria improved in the two groups but significantly more in the thermal pulsation arm. In particular, the limited compliance of 30% in the eyelid margin massage arm should be noted. Safety parameters, such as visual acuity and intraocular pressure (IOP) remained normal in all patients. CONCLUSION: A single session of thermal pulsation showed significantly better results in the efficacy and safety profile after 3 months compared to eyelid margin massage once daily; however, the high costs for the patients due to the single use mode of the activators must be taken in account.
PURPOSE: Thermal pulsation (LipiFlow®, Johnson&Johnson, Santa Ana, CA, USA) has been advocated for meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) treatment and was found to be useful in many studies. The aim of this study was to show the efficacy of the method and to compare it to a daily eyelid margin massage in a non-university institution. METHODS: A non-blinded, single-center interventional study comparing thermal pulsation with eyelid margin massage for the treatment of MDD. In this study 30 patients were recruited during daily office hours. Symptoms (OSDI) and ocular surface (NIK-BUT, tear ferning test, tear meniscus height, LIPCO folds, meibography, meibomian gland evaluator) were assessed before treatment. A total of 15 patients (9 women) underwent thermal pulsation (single session), while 15 patients (8 women) performed eyelid margin massage (once daily) as instructed for 3 months. RESULTS: Before the two treatment methods, there were no differences in the above parameters, gender and age were also normally distributed. After treatment, both subjective and objective criteria improved in the two groups but significantly more in the thermal pulsation arm. In particular, the limited compliance of 30% in the eyelid margin massage arm should be noted. Safety parameters, such as visual acuity and intraocular pressure (IOP) remained normal in all patients. CONCLUSION: A single session of thermal pulsation showed significantly better results in the efficacy and safety profile after 3 months compared to eyelid margin massage once daily; however, the high costs for the patients due to the single use mode of the activators must be taken in account.
Authors: Raied Fagehi; Ibrahim M Abbadi; Ali Abusharha; Mana A Alanazi; Hafiz Malhan; Gamal A El-Hiti; Ali M Masmali Journal: Klin Monbl Augenheilkd Date: 2021-02-19 Impact factor: 0.700