Tsz Wing Yim, Andrew D Pucker, Erin Rueff, William Ngo, Anna A Tichenor, John E Conto
{"title":"LipiFlow for the treatment of dry eye disease: A Cochrane systematic review summary.","authors":"Tsz Wing Yim, Andrew D Pucker, Erin Rueff, William Ngo, Anna A Tichenor, John E Conto","doi":"10.1016/j.clae.2024.102335","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the effectiveness and the safety of LipiFlow for treating signs and symptoms of dry eye disease (DED) in adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The following databases were searched for randomized trials: CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase.com, PubMed, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP on 24 October 2022. The included studies were conducted in adults (≥18 years) with DED or meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) as defined by the investigators. Standard Cochrane methodology was applied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study included 13 trials that randomized a total of 1,155 participants (66 % female; age range = 19 to 86 years). Five trials compared LipiFlow with basic warm compresses. Analyzing symptom scores in these trials yielded conflicting evidence of a difference in symptoms between LipiFlow and basic warm compresses after 4 weeks. There was no evidence of a difference in meibomian gland expression, meibum quality, or tear breakup time when comparing LipiFlow with basic warm compresses. Another 5 trials compared LipiFlow with thermostatic devices. Analysis of symptom scores in these trials at 4 weeks showed that thermostatic devices had reduced Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) scores by a mean difference of 4.59 as compared with LipiFlow. The remaining 3 included trials could not be grouped for comparisons. The overall evidence was of low or very low certainty, with most trials being assessed as having a high risk of bias. No trial reported any intervention-related, vision-threating adverse events.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>LipiFlow performs similarly to other DED treatments. Further research with adequate masking and a standardized testing methodology is still needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":49087,"journal":{"name":"Contact Lens & Anterior Eye","volume":" ","pages":"102335"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contact Lens & Anterior Eye","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2024.102335","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness and the safety of LipiFlow for treating signs and symptoms of dry eye disease (DED) in adults.
Methods: The following databases were searched for randomized trials: CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase.com, PubMed, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP on 24 October 2022. The included studies were conducted in adults (≥18 years) with DED or meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) as defined by the investigators. Standard Cochrane methodology was applied.
Results: This study included 13 trials that randomized a total of 1,155 participants (66 % female; age range = 19 to 86 years). Five trials compared LipiFlow with basic warm compresses. Analyzing symptom scores in these trials yielded conflicting evidence of a difference in symptoms between LipiFlow and basic warm compresses after 4 weeks. There was no evidence of a difference in meibomian gland expression, meibum quality, or tear breakup time when comparing LipiFlow with basic warm compresses. Another 5 trials compared LipiFlow with thermostatic devices. Analysis of symptom scores in these trials at 4 weeks showed that thermostatic devices had reduced Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) scores by a mean difference of 4.59 as compared with LipiFlow. The remaining 3 included trials could not be grouped for comparisons. The overall evidence was of low or very low certainty, with most trials being assessed as having a high risk of bias. No trial reported any intervention-related, vision-threating adverse events.
Conclusions: LipiFlow performs similarly to other DED treatments. Further research with adequate masking and a standardized testing methodology is still needed.
期刊介绍:
Contact Lens & Anterior Eye is a research-based journal covering all aspects of contact lens theory and practice, including original articles on invention and innovations, as well as the regular features of: Case Reports; Literary Reviews; Editorials; Instrumentation and Techniques and Dates of Professional Meetings.