Guoji Yanke Zazhi (Sep 2023)
Efficacy of different frequency of intense pulsed light in the treatment of meibomian gland dysfunction
Abstract
AIM: To investigate the efficacy and safety of frequency of intense pulsed light(IPL)in the treatment of meibomian gland dysfunction.METHODS: In this retrospective study, a total of 108 patients(216 eyes)with meibomian gland dysfunction admitted to our hospital from January 2021 to June 2022 were included. They were divided into two groups, with 54 cases(108 eyes)IPL group(energy density 13.0J/cm2, pulse width 6ms, delay time 50ms), and 54 cases(108 eyes)in advanced optimal pulsed technology(AOPT)group(energy density 10.0-16.0J/cm2, pulse width 7-4-4 ms in unequal-division mode). The clinical effects of the two groups were observed and compared, including ocular surface symptoms, corneal fluorescein staining score(FL), tear film lipid layer thickness(LLT), ocular surface disease index(OSDI)score, mean non-invasive tear film break-up time(NIBUTav)and first non-invasive tear film break-up time(NIBUTf), tear meniscus height, score of meibomian gland secretion and its secretion traits, and the incidence of adverse effects was also calculated.RESULTS: The effective rate of the AOPT group(106 eyes, 98.1%)was higher than that of the IPL group(90 eyes, 83.3%, P<0.05), as well as OSDI score, FL score, score of meibomian gland secretion and its secretion traits, LLT NIBUTav, NIBUTf and tear meniscus height(all P<0.001). However, the incidence of adverse effects of the AOPT group(18 eyes, 16.7%)was higher than that of the IPL group(4 eyes, 3.7%; P<0.05).CONCLUSION: With significant improvement in the ocular surface symptoms and function, AOPT has a better therapeutic effect on the treatment of meibomian gland dysfunction, but it has more adverse reactions. Therefore, optimal treatment plan should be fully selected in combination with the actual clinical situation.
Keywords
