Dataset Information

Comparison of the iLUX and the LipiFlow for the Treatment of Meibomian Gland Dysfunction and Symptoms: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT: Purpose:To compare the effects of eyelid treatment with the iLUX MGD Treatment System and the LipiFlow Thermal Pulsation System on objective and subjective parameters of meibomian gland function and symptoms. Patients and Methods:In this randomized, open-label, controlled, multicenter clinical trial, both eyes of 142 patients aged ?18 years with Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) scores ?23, total meibomian gland scores (MGS) ?12 in the lower eyelid of each eye, and tear break-up time (TBUT) <10 s were randomized 1:1 to iLUX or LipiFlow treatment, with stratification by test center. The primary effectiveness endpoints were changes in total MGS (masked) and TBUT from baseline to 4 weeks. The secondary effectiveness endpoint was changed in OSDI score from baseline to 4 weeks. Results:Both devices significantly improved effectiveness outcomes, with no differences between the two devices. At the 4-week visit, mean MGS, TBUT, and OSDI scores improved at least 16.9 ± 11.5, 2.6 ± 3.2 s, and 28.0 ± 22.8, respectively, across treatment groups and treated eyes. Four device/procedure-related events occurred in the iLUX group, compared with none in the LipiFlow group, but there were no device-related adverse events that involved changes in lid margins, eyelids, or lash integrity. Corneal staining, intraocular pressure, and visual acuity did not differ in the two groups. Conclusion:Both treatments produced significant improvements in meibomian gland function and symptoms. For all effectiveness measures, there were no statistically significant differences between the two treatments.

SUBMITTER: Tauber J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7024784 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of the iLUX and the LipiFlow for the Treatment of Meibomian Gland Dysfunction and Symptoms: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Tauber Joseph J Owen James J Bloomenstein Marc M Hovanesian John J Bullimore Mark A MA

Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) 20200212

<h4>Purpose</h4>To compare the effects of eyelid treatment with the iLUX MGD Treatment System and the LipiFlow Thermal Pulsation System on objective and subjective parameters of meibomian gland function and symptoms.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>In this randomized, open-label, controlled, multicenter clinical trial, both eyes of 142 patients aged ≥18 years with Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) scores ≥23, total meibomian gland scores (MGS) ≤12 in the lower eyelid of each eye, and tear break-up ...[more]

PMID: 32103887

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimThe main treatment for meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD), a major cause of dry eye, is eyelid warming. Lack of compliance is the main reason for treatment failure. This has led to the development of eyelid-warming devices that are safe, effective and convenient. To obtain robust evidence demonstrating their efficacy, the authors conducted a 3-arm randomized clinical study.MethodsThe authors conducted a 3-month assessor-blinded, randomized, controlled trial of patients from the Singapore National Eye Centre experiencing at least one of eight dry eye symptoms 'often' or 'all the time'. Patients who wore contact lenses, had an active infection or known diagnosis of thyroid dysfunction and rheumatoid arthritis were excluded from the study. MGD participants were randomly assigned to warm towel (n = 25), EyeGiene(®) (Eyedetec Medical Inc., Danville, CA, USA) (n = 25) and Blephasteam(®) (Spectrum Thea Pharmaceuticals LTD, Macclesfield, UK) (n = 25) treatments. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes included the proportions of participants with improved symptoms and changes in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), respectively. Other outcomes included tear break up time (TBUT), Schirmer test, corneal fluorescein dye staining and number of visibly occluded meibomian gland (MG) orifices.ResultsThe study population was 53.5 ± 11.1 years old and predominantly Chinese. For severity of symptom after 3 months of treatment, 78.3% Blephasteam(®) participants reported improvement compared to 45.5% warm towel participants (p = 0.023). The corresponding proportions for improvement in the frequency of symptoms were 82.6% and 50.0%, respectively (p = 0.020). The proportions of improvement of symptoms in EyeGiene(®) patients were not significantly different from warm towel intervention. At 1 month of treatment, the crude odds ratio of improvement of severity of irritation for Blephasteam(®) compared to control was 3.0 (95% CI 0.88-10.18). However, the odds ratio adjusted by age was 5.67 (1.30-24.66). The lid-warming treatments did not significantly change the TBUT, Schirmer test results or number of visibly occluded MGs in the study period. All treatment modalities did not worsen BCVA after 3 months.ConclusionBlephasteam(®) is more effective than warm towel for MGD treatment, with warm towel and EyeGiene(®) being comparable effective. Older age might predict for treatment efficacy. All studied therapies were safe for visual acuity (VA) for 3 months of treatment.

Project description:PurposeTo 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).MethodsThis 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).ResultsThe 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).ConclusionIPL 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.

Dataset Information

Comparison of the iLUX and the LipiFlow for the Treatment of Meibomian Gland Dysfunction and Symptoms: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Publications

Comparison of the iLUX and the LipiFlow for the Treatment of Meibomian Gland Dysfunction and Symptoms: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets