Laufenböck Christoph
, Färbergasse 13, Haus A, 6850, Dornbirn, Österreich.
Ophthalmologie. 2022 Jun;119(6):605-610. doi: 10.1007/s00347-021-01541-y. Epub 2021 Dec 4.
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.
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.
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.
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.
热脉动疗法(LipiFlow®,美国加利福尼亚州圣安娜市强生公司)已被推荐用于睑板腺功能障碍(MGD)的治疗,并且在许多研究中被证明是有效的。本研究的目的是展示该方法的疗效,并在非大学机构中将其与每日睑缘按摩进行比较。
一项非盲、单中心干预性研究,比较热脉动疗法与睑缘按摩治疗睑板腺功能障碍(MDD)的效果。在本研究中,在日常办公时间招募了30名患者。在治疗前评估症状(眼表疾病指数,OSDI)和眼表情况(非侵入性泪膜破裂时间,NIK-BUT、泪液蕨状试验、泪液半月皱襞高度、脂质层干涉图褶皱、睑板腺造影、睑板腺评估仪)。总共15名患者(9名女性)接受热脉动疗法(单次治疗),而15名患者(8名女性)按照指示进行睑缘按摩(每日一次),持续3个月。
在两种治疗方法之前,上述参数没有差异,性别和年龄也呈正态分布。治疗后,两组的主观和客观标准均有所改善,但热脉动疗法组改善更为显著。特别需要注意的是,睑缘按摩组有30%的患者依从性有限。所有患者的安全参数,如视力和眼压(IOP)均保持正常。
与每日一次的睑缘按摩相比,单次热脉动疗法在3个月后的疗效和安全性方面显示出明显更好的结果;然而,必须考虑到由于激活剂的一次性使用模式给患者带来的高昂费用。