Efficacy comparison of intense pulsed light combined with meibomian gland massage and eyelid fumigation massage in the treatment of MGD-related dry eyes

• Main Authors: Peng-Fei Dai, Ying Li, Fang Tian, Yu-Qian Wang, Shan-Shan Ni, Jie Wang
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Press of International Journal of Ophthalmology (IJO PRESS) 2019-12-01
• Series: Guoji Yanke Zazhi
• Subjects: intensive pulsed light; meibomian gland massage; meibomian gland dysfunction; dry eyes; therapeutic effect comparison
• Online Access: http://ies.ijo.cn/cn_publish/2019/12/201912024.pdf

AIM:To observe and compare the therapeutic effects of intense pulsed light(IPL)combined with meibomian gland massage and eyelid fumigation massage on dry eyes associated with meibomian gland dysfunction(MGD).<p>METHODS: This study was a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. Totally 73(146 eyes)outpatients with MGD-related dry eyes were selected from March 2018 to August 2018 at Xi'an No.4 Hospital. 38 patients(76 eyes)in the experimental group were given IPL combined meibomian gland massage treatment(once every three weeks, three times in all), and 35 patients(70 eyes)in the control group were given eyelid fumigation combined meibomian gland massage treatment(fumigating and cleaning the eyelid margin every day for 5d, massaging the tarsal gland on the fifth day, repeating treatment after 2wk, totally 3 times). The study lasted 12wk. The ocular surface disease index(OSDI), standard dry eye assessment questionnaire(SPEED), non-invasive tear film rupture time(NITBUT), non-invasive lacrimal river height measurement(NITMH), meibomian gland loss score(MGS), meibomian gland secretion assessment(MGYSS)before and after the first treatment, the first week, the fourth week, the seventh week and the twelfth week were recorded to evaluate the curative effect of the two treatments.<p>RESULTS: There was no significant difference in gender and age between the two groups(<i>P</i>>0.05).There was no significant difference in data between the two groups before treatment(<i>P</i>>0.05). Indexes except NITMH and MGS each time point after treatment in the two groups were significantly improved compared with those before treatment, and the difference was statistically significant(<i>P</i><0.05). There was no significant difference in each index between the experimental group and the control group at 1wk after treatment(<i>P</i>>0.05); at 4, 7 and 12wk after treatment, the experimental group was superior to the control group except for NITMH and MGS, and the difference was statistically significant(<i>P</i><0.05). From the change trend of the indicators, the therapeutic effect of the experimental group continued to improve after the first treatment, and was the best at the 12th week, while that of the control group was the best at the 7th week after the first treatment, and then the curative effect was weakened. There were no obvious complications in both groups after treatment.<p>CONCLUSION: Both intense pulsed light combined with palpebral gland massage and eyelid fumigation massage are convenient, safe and effective for MGD-related dry eyes, and the curative effect and maintenance time of intense pulsed light combined with palpebral gland massage are better than that of eyelid fumigation massage.