一项随机对照试验中,常规睑缘卫生与额外热脉动系统对长期使用抗青光眼药物治疗的睑板腺功能障碍患者的疗效比较。
The Efficacy Between Conventional Lid Hygiene and Additional Thermal Pulsatile System in Meibomian Gland Dysfunction Patients Treated with Long-Term Anti-Glaucoma Medications in a Randomized Controlled Trial.
作者信息
Kasetsuwan Ngamjit, Suwajanakorn Disorn, Tantipat Chitchanok, Reinprayoon Usanee
机构信息
Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University and King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Bangkok 10330, Thailand.
出版信息
Clin Ophthalmol. 2020 Sep 28;14:2891-2902. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S259692. eCollection 2020.
PURPOSE
To evaluate the efficacy of additional thermal pulsatile system compared to standard lid hygiene alone in meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) patients who are using long-term anti-glaucoma medications.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
Well-controlled glaucoma patients who used anti-glaucoma medications for at least 1 year and had MGD were enrolled and randomized between a study group who received thermal pulsatile system (Lipiflow) treatment and standard lid hygiene, and a control group who received standard lid hygiene alone. The primary outcome was meibomian gland expression score, and the secondary outcomes were the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) score, Schirmer test score, tear break-up time (TBUT), corneal staining score, lipid layer thickness (LLT), and meibography score. All the outcomes were re-evaluated at 1 week, then at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment.
RESULTS
Of 60 participants who underwent randomization, 48 completed the study. At the 6-month mark, this study could not demonstrate any significant difference between groups in both primary and secondary outcomes. However, there was significant improvement from baseline in both groups of the following outcomes: meibomian gland expression score, OSDI score, LLT, and meibography score. No serious adverse event was found in this study.
CONCLUSION
An additional single thermal pulsatile system treatment with standard lid hygiene significantly improved meibomian gland assessment score and subjective symptoms at 6 months. Any difference between additional thermal pulsatile system treatment and lid hygiene alone was not found in this study. The results may suggest more chronic MGD and more damaged meibomian gland induced by long-term anti-glaucoma medications.
目的
评估在长期使用抗青光眼药物的睑板腺功能障碍(MGD)患者中,与单纯标准睑缘清洁相比,额外使用热脉动系统的疗效。
患者与方法
纳入使用抗青光眼药物至少1年且患有MGD的病情控制良好的青光眼患者,并将其随机分为两组,一组为接受热脉动系统(Lipiflow)治疗及标准睑缘清洁的研究组,另一组为仅接受标准睑缘清洁的对照组。主要结局指标为睑板腺挤压评分,次要结局指标包括眼表疾病指数(OSDI)评分、泪液分泌试验评分、泪膜破裂时间(TBUT)、角膜染色评分、脂质层厚度(LLT)及睑板腺造影评分。所有结局指标在治疗后1周、1个月、3个月及6个月时重新评估。
结果
60名随机分组的参与者中,48名完成了研究。在6个月时,本研究未能证明两组在主要和次要结局指标上存在任何显著差异。然而,两组在以下结局指标上均较基线有显著改善:睑板腺挤压评分、OSDI评分、LLT及睑板腺造影评分。本研究未发现严重不良事件。
结论
在标准睑缘清洁基础上额外进行单次热脉动系统治疗,在6个月时显著改善了睑板腺评估评分及主观症状。本研究未发现额外热脉动系统治疗与单纯睑缘清洁之间存在任何差异。结果可能提示长期抗青光眼药物导致更慢性的MGD及更受损的睑板腺。