{"title":"Randomized clinical trial: MGrx versus standard debridement and expression for meibomian gland dysfunction.","authors":"David A Semp, Debarun Dutta, James S Wolffsohn","doi":"10.1097/OPX.0000000000002204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Significance: </strong>Evaporative dry eye disease, due to meibomian gland dysfunction, causes significant suffering for millions of people globally, yet satisfactory long-term treatment remains elusive for many. Investigation of potential therapies for meibomian gland dysfunction is therefore of high importance to clinicians and their patients.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to compare the efficacy of a new device for meibomian gland debridement and expression to that of the conventional way of providing this treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty participants (mean age, 36.4 ± 15.4 years; 77% female) fulfilling current Tear Film & Ocular Surface Society diagnostic criteria for dry eye disease and meibomian gland dysfunction were recruited (Research Registry, 10340). Fifteen participants each were randomized to receive a single treatment with either traditional debridement (using a golf-club spud), heating (10 minutes of Blepha EyeBag, Théa Laboratories, Clermont-Ferrand, France) and expression (with forceps), or the multimodal MGrx, which comprises a handheld device with heated debridement, massage, and expression attachments. Symptomatology, tear film, and ocular surface measures were assessed at baseline and at 4 and 8 weeks post-treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ocular Surface Disease Index, 5-Item Dry Eye Questionnaire, and Symptom Assessment in Dry Eye symptom questionnaire scores all improved significantly with both treatments (all p<0.001), with no subsequent deterioration for at least 8 weeks. The improvement was similar between treatment groups (all p>0.05). Clinical signs, of blink rate, tear film quality and quantity, ocular surface characteristics, and meibomian gland expressibility, were all unchanged with both treatments (all p>0.05) except for noninvasive tear breakup time, which deteriorated in the conventional treatment group (p=0.006) between 4 and 8 weeks post-treatment. No adverse reactions were reported, and all participants were able to tolerate treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A single application of meibomian gland debridement and expression resulted in sustained improvements in the symptoms of dry eye disease, in both treatment groups. The MGrx device provides a safe and effective in-office treatment for evaporative dry eye disease, and has time and space advantages compared with conventional treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":19649,"journal":{"name":"Optometry and Vision Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Optometry and Vision Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000002204","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Significance: Evaporative dry eye disease, due to meibomian gland dysfunction, causes significant suffering for millions of people globally, yet satisfactory long-term treatment remains elusive for many. Investigation of potential therapies for meibomian gland dysfunction is therefore of high importance to clinicians and their patients.
Purpose: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of a new device for meibomian gland debridement and expression to that of the conventional way of providing this treatment.
Methods: Thirty participants (mean age, 36.4 ± 15.4 years; 77% female) fulfilling current Tear Film & Ocular Surface Society diagnostic criteria for dry eye disease and meibomian gland dysfunction were recruited (Research Registry, 10340). Fifteen participants each were randomized to receive a single treatment with either traditional debridement (using a golf-club spud), heating (10 minutes of Blepha EyeBag, Théa Laboratories, Clermont-Ferrand, France) and expression (with forceps), or the multimodal MGrx, which comprises a handheld device with heated debridement, massage, and expression attachments. Symptomatology, tear film, and ocular surface measures were assessed at baseline and at 4 and 8 weeks post-treatment.
Results: Ocular Surface Disease Index, 5-Item Dry Eye Questionnaire, and Symptom Assessment in Dry Eye symptom questionnaire scores all improved significantly with both treatments (all p<0.001), with no subsequent deterioration for at least 8 weeks. The improvement was similar between treatment groups (all p>0.05). Clinical signs, of blink rate, tear film quality and quantity, ocular surface characteristics, and meibomian gland expressibility, were all unchanged with both treatments (all p>0.05) except for noninvasive tear breakup time, which deteriorated in the conventional treatment group (p=0.006) between 4 and 8 weeks post-treatment. No adverse reactions were reported, and all participants were able to tolerate treatment.
Conclusions: A single application of meibomian gland debridement and expression resulted in sustained improvements in the symptoms of dry eye disease, in both treatment groups. The MGrx device provides a safe and effective in-office treatment for evaporative dry eye disease, and has time and space advantages compared with conventional treatment.
期刊介绍:
Optometry and Vision Science is the monthly peer-reviewed scientific publication of the American Academy of Optometry, publishing original research since 1924. Optometry and Vision Science is an internationally recognized source for education and information on current discoveries in optometry, physiological optics, vision science, and related fields. The journal considers original contributions that advance clinical practice, vision science, and public health. Authors should remember that the journal reaches readers worldwide and their submissions should be relevant and of interest to a broad audience. Topical priorities include, but are not limited to: clinical and laboratory research, evidence-based reviews, contact lenses, ocular growth and refractive error development, eye movements, visual function and perception, biology of the eye and ocular disease, epidemiology and public health, biomedical optics and instrumentation, novel and important clinical observations and treatments, and optometric education.