Punctal plugs versus artificial tears for treating dry eye: a comparative observation of their effects on contrast sensitivity.

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the effects of treatment with punctal plugs versus artificial tears on visual function and tear film stability for dry eye. A total of 56 consecutive eyes of 28 dry eye patients observed at our clinic from May to October in 2009 were divided into two groups. One group (32 eyes of 16 patients) was treated with artificial tears, and punctal plugs were used in the other group (24 eyes of 12 patients). A questionnaire was used in these patients before treatment and was repeated 2 weeks after treatment. Fluorescent staining for tear film break-up time (BUT), the Schirmer test I (STI), and contrast sensitivity was performed at the same time. The questionnaire indicated that all patients complained about the uncomfortable symptoms associated with dry eye. These symptoms were relieved after the application of artificial tears or punctal plugs, and there was no significant difference between these two groups. We found that the corneal fluorescent staining disappeared after treatment. The BUT was improved significantly after treatment in both groups, but the improvement was greater in patients who received punctal plugs than those that received artificial tears. There was no remarkable change in the STI in the artificial tears group, but a significant change was observed in the punctal plugs group. The contrast sensitivities were greatly improved in simulated daylight, night, and glare disability conditions after treatment with artificial tears and punctal plugs. However, the changes in contrast sensitivity did not significantly differ between groups. Both artificial tears and punctal plugs relieved dry eye symptoms, repaired corneal lesions, enhanced tear film stability, and improved contrast sensitivity. Punctal plugs could improve tear film stability and elongate the BUT better than artificial tears.