The Efficacy Between Conventional Lid Hygiene and Additional Thermal Pulsatile System in Meibomian Gland Dysfunction...

To evaluate the efficacy of additional thermal pulsatile system compared to standard lid hygiene alone in meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) patients who are using long-term anti-glaucoma medications.

Well-controlled glaucoma patients who used anti-glaucoma medications for at least 1 year and had MGD were enrolled and randomized between a study group who received thermal pulsatile system (Lipiflow^®) treatment and standard lid hygiene, and a control group who received standard lid hygiene alone. The primary outcome was meibomian gland expression score, and the secondary outcomes were the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) score, Schirmer test score, tear break-up time (TBUT), corneal staining score, lipid layer thickness (LLT), and meibography score. All the outcomes were re-evaluated at 1 week, then at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment.

Of 60 participants who underwent randomization, 48 completed the study. At the 6-month mark, this study could not demonstrate any significant difference between groups in both primary and secondary outcomes. However, there was significant improvement from baseline in both groups of the following outcomes: meibomian gland expression score, OSDI score, LLT, and meibography score. No serious adverse event was found in this study.

An additional single thermal pulsatile system treatment with standard lid hygiene significantly improved meibomian gland assessment score and subjective symptoms at 6 months. Any difference between additional thermal pulsatile system treatment and lid hygiene alone was not found in this study. The results may suggest more chronic MGD and more damaged meibomian gland induced by long-term anti-glaucoma medications.