Eye & contact lens · 2021
Comparative Study of Two Infrared Meibographers in Evaporative Dry Eye Versus Nondry Eye Patients.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Garduño Fernando, Salinas Anna, Contreras Katia, Rios Yadira, García Naomi, Quintanilla Patricio, Mendoza Cesar, Garza Leon Manuel
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the measurement of the meibomian gland (MG) dropout between two infrared meibographers in patients with and without dry eye.
METHODS: The right eyelids of each patient were imaged using the Antares and Cobra meibography devices. All images were analyzed using Phoenix software to calculate the percentage of the MG dropout. Lipid layer thickness, eyelid margin characteristics, ocular surface staining, MG secretion, number of expressible glands, and noninvasive tear breakup time were also evaluated. A comparison between nondry eye and evaporative dry eye was performed.
RESULTS: Eighty participants (mean age, 36.93 years and 51.3% women) were included, of which 67.5% had nondry eye. A significant difference was observed in the dropout percentage of the superior eyelid between the Antares and Cobra devices (P=0.007) for all participants and when only the nondry eye patients were examined. In patients with dry eye, no significant differences were found in the dropout measurements of both eyelids.
CONCLUSIONS: Statistically significant differences in the MG dropout percentage in the upper eyelid of nondry eye patients were obtained from both meibographers. The measurements were similar in patients with dry eye, suggesting that the two instruments can be interchanged.
METHODS: The right eyelids of each patient were imaged using the Antares and Cobra meibography devices. All images were analyzed using Phoenix software to calculate the percentage of the MG dropout. Lipid layer thickness, eyelid margin characteristics, ocular surface staining, MG secretion, number of expressible glands, and noninvasive tear breakup time were also evaluated. A comparison between nondry eye and evaporative dry eye was performed.
RESULTS: Eighty participants (mean age, 36.93 years and 51.3% women) were included, of which 67.5% had nondry eye. A significant difference was observed in the dropout percentage of the superior eyelid between the Antares and Cobra devices (P=0.007) for all participants and when only the nondry eye patients were examined. In patients with dry eye, no significant differences were found in the dropout measurements of both eyelids.
CONCLUSIONS: Statistically significant differences in the MG dropout percentage in the upper eyelid of nondry eye patients were obtained from both meibographers. The measurements were similar in patients with dry eye, suggesting that the two instruments can be interchanged.