Lasers in surgery and medicine · 2020
Adverse Events of Intense Pulsed Light Combined With Meibomian Gland Expression Versus Meibomian Gland Expression in the Treatment of Meibomian Gland Dysfunction.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Qiao Chen, Li Liping, Wang Haoyu, Zhao Cong, Ke Lan, Sen Dan, Qi Mengying, Li Shaowei, Wang Mingwu, Zeng Qingyan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To analyze the occurrence and causes of adverse events (AEs) in intense pulsed light (IPL) combined with meibomian gland expression (MGX) and MGX treatment alone for meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD).
STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on MGD patients treated in Wuhan Aier Hankou Eye Hospital from February 2018 to October 2019 to compare the AEs between IPL-MGX and MGX groups. Relevant AEs that occurred during the treatment and within 1 month after the patients' last treatment were recorded and the causes of the AEs were analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 2,282 patients received IPL-MGX and 1,407 received MGX treatment. No serious AEs occurred in both groups. There were 74 AEs in the IPL-MGX group, with an incidence of 3.24%, including 14 significant AEs (2 cases of epidemic keratoconjunctivitis, 1 recurrent herpes simplex keratitis (HSK), 9 new onsets of floaters, 1 recurrent glaucomatocyclitic crises, and 1 recurrent iridocyclitis). There were 27 AEs in the MGX group with a rate of 1.92%, including 4 significant AEs (2 cases of keratoconjunctivitis epidemic, 2 new cases of floaters). Compared with the IPL-MGX group, the incidence of AEs in the MGX group was lower (P = 0.017).
CONCLUSIONS: Both IPL-MGX and MGX treatment are safe therapies with low risk for AEs. IPL treatment is not recommended for young children (age 10 or less) as well as patients with anterior uveitis or glaucomatocyclitic crises. The previous history of HSK and eyes with high myopia are advised to exercise caution in IPL treatment. Lasers Surg. Med. © 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on MGD patients treated in Wuhan Aier Hankou Eye Hospital from February 2018 to October 2019 to compare the AEs between IPL-MGX and MGX groups. Relevant AEs that occurred during the treatment and within 1 month after the patients' last treatment were recorded and the causes of the AEs were analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 2,282 patients received IPL-MGX and 1,407 received MGX treatment. No serious AEs occurred in both groups. There were 74 AEs in the IPL-MGX group, with an incidence of 3.24%, including 14 significant AEs (2 cases of epidemic keratoconjunctivitis, 1 recurrent herpes simplex keratitis (HSK), 9 new onsets of floaters, 1 recurrent glaucomatocyclitic crises, and 1 recurrent iridocyclitis). There were 27 AEs in the MGX group with a rate of 1.92%, including 4 significant AEs (2 cases of keratoconjunctivitis epidemic, 2 new cases of floaters). Compared with the IPL-MGX group, the incidence of AEs in the MGX group was lower (P = 0.017).
CONCLUSIONS: Both IPL-MGX and MGX treatment are safe therapies with low risk for AEs. IPL treatment is not recommended for young children (age 10 or less) as well as patients with anterior uveitis or glaucomatocyclitic crises. The previous history of HSK and eyes with high myopia are advised to exercise caution in IPL treatment. Lasers Surg. Med. © 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.