Acta ophthalmologica · 2021
Comparison of intense pulsed light and near-infrared light in the treatment of dry eye disease: a prospective randomized study.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Ren Xiaotong, Chou Yilin, Wang Yuexin, Chen Yanyan, Liu Ziyuan, Li Xuemin
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of intense pulsed light (IPL) and near-infrared light (NIL) treatments in alleviating symptoms and signs of dry eye disease (DED).
METHODS: Patients diagnosed with DED at the Peking University Third Hospital Eye Center from January 2019 to October 2019 were randomized to undergo either NIL therapy combined with meibomian gland expression (MGX; NIL Group) or IPL combined with MGX (IPL Group). Treatments were performed three times at 1-month intervals. DED signs and symptoms were evaluated before every treatment. We compared the clinical improvement within and between the groups. Additional comparisons were made according to the meibomian gland (MG) dropout grade.
RESULTS: A total of 260 eyes of 130 patients (mean age, 49.68 ± 18.01 years) were included. The dryness and total symptom scores and the MG expressibility and secretion quality (upper and lower eyelids) significantly improved after the three treatments in both groups (p < 0.05). However, IPL had superior efficacy in improving blurred vision, photophobia, burning, increased secretions and the total symptom score at 2 months in patients with more severe MG dropout.
CONCLUSIONS: Both IPL and NIL treatments were effective in the treatment of DED, but IPL provided greater symptom improvement, particularly in patients with severe MG dropout. NIL can be a new therapeutic option for the treatment of DED.
METHODS: Patients diagnosed with DED at the Peking University Third Hospital Eye Center from January 2019 to October 2019 were randomized to undergo either NIL therapy combined with meibomian gland expression (MGX; NIL Group) or IPL combined with MGX (IPL Group). Treatments were performed three times at 1-month intervals. DED signs and symptoms were evaluated before every treatment. We compared the clinical improvement within and between the groups. Additional comparisons were made according to the meibomian gland (MG) dropout grade.
RESULTS: A total of 260 eyes of 130 patients (mean age, 49.68 ± 18.01 years) were included. The dryness and total symptom scores and the MG expressibility and secretion quality (upper and lower eyelids) significantly improved after the three treatments in both groups (p < 0.05). However, IPL had superior efficacy in improving blurred vision, photophobia, burning, increased secretions and the total symptom score at 2 months in patients with more severe MG dropout.
CONCLUSIONS: Both IPL and NIL treatments were effective in the treatment of DED, but IPL provided greater symptom improvement, particularly in patients with severe MG dropout. NIL can be a new therapeutic option for the treatment of DED.