开发干眼症指数,作为干眼症的新生物标记。

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-02 DOI:10.1111/opo.13373
César Gala-Núñez, Sonia Ortiz-Peregrina, Diego Castanera-Gratacós, Rosario G Anera
{"title":"开发干眼症指数,作为干眼症的新生物标记。","authors":"César Gala-Núñez, Sonia Ortiz-Peregrina, Diego Castanera-Gratacós, Rosario G Anera","doi":"10.1111/opo.13373","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate signs and symptoms in patients diagnosed with dry eye disease (DED), divided into dry eye (DE) groups, in order to find a new biomarker that allows an accurate diagnosis, management and classification of DED.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional, observational study included 71 DED subjects. Subjective symptoms, visual quality and DE signs were assessed using the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), the Quality of Vision (QoV) questionnaire, best corrected distance visual acuity (VA), functional visual acuity (FVA), contrast sensitivity (CS), high- and low-order corneal aberrations (HOA and LOA, respectively), tear break-up time (TBUT), Meibomian Gland Dysfunction (MGD), Schirmer test, corneal staining, lid wiper epitheliopathy (LWE) and meibography. Participants were classified into three groups based on dryness severity using a cluster analysis, i.e., mild (N = 17, 55.8 ± 15.4 years), moderate (N = 41, 63.5 ± 10.6 years) and severe (N = 13, 65.0 ± 12.0). A new Dry Eye Severity Index (DESI) based on ocular surface signs has been developed and its association with symptoms, visual quality and signs was assessed. Comparisons between groups were made using Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-squared tests. Spearman correlation analysis was also performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The DESI was based on three tests for DE signs: TBUT, Schirmer test and MGD. The DESI showed significant differences between different pairs of groups: Mild Dryness versus Moderate Dryness (p < 0.001), Mild Dryness versus Severe Dryness (p < 0.001) and Moderate Dryness versus Severe Dryness (p < 0.001). The DESI was significantly correlated with age (rho = -0.30; p = 0.01), OSDI score (rho = -0.32; p = 0.007), QoV score (rho = -0.35; p = 0.003), VA (rho = -0.34; p = 0.003), FVA (rho = -0.38; p = 0.001) and CS (rho = 0.42; p < 0.001) Also, significant differences between the severity groups were found for OSDI and QoV scores, VA, FVA, CS and MGD (p < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The DESI has good performance as a biomarker for the diagnosis, classification and management of DED.</p>","PeriodicalId":19522,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development of a dry eye index as a new biomarker of dry eye disease.\",\"authors\":\"César Gala-Núñez, Sonia Ortiz-Peregrina, Diego Castanera-Gratacós, Rosario G Anera\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/opo.13373\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate signs and symptoms in patients diagnosed with dry eye disease (DED), divided into dry eye (DE) groups, in order to find a new biomarker that allows an accurate diagnosis, management and classification of DED.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional, observational study included 71 DED subjects. Subjective symptoms, visual quality and DE signs were assessed using the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), the Quality of Vision (QoV) questionnaire, best corrected distance visual acuity (VA), functional visual acuity (FVA), contrast sensitivity (CS), high- and low-order corneal aberrations (HOA and LOA, respectively), tear break-up time (TBUT), Meibomian Gland Dysfunction (MGD), Schirmer test, corneal staining, lid wiper epitheliopathy (LWE) and meibography. Participants were classified into three groups based on dryness severity using a cluster analysis, i.e., mild (N = 17, 55.8 ± 15.4 years), moderate (N = 41, 63.5 ± 10.6 years) and severe (N = 13, 65.0 ± 12.0). A new Dry Eye Severity Index (DESI) based on ocular surface signs has been developed and its association with symptoms, visual quality and signs was assessed. Comparisons between groups were made using Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-squared tests. Spearman correlation analysis was also performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The DESI was based on three tests for DE signs: TBUT, Schirmer test and MGD. The DESI showed significant differences between different pairs of groups: Mild Dryness versus Moderate Dryness (p < 0.001), Mild Dryness versus Severe Dryness (p < 0.001) and Moderate Dryness versus Severe Dryness (p < 0.001). The DESI was significantly correlated with age (rho = -0.30; p = 0.01), OSDI score (rho = -0.32; p = 0.007), QoV score (rho = -0.35; p = 0.003), VA (rho = -0.34; p = 0.003), FVA (rho = -0.38; p = 0.001) and CS (rho = 0.42; p < 0.001) Also, significant differences between the severity groups were found for OSDI and QoV scores, VA, FVA, CS and MGD (p < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The DESI has good performance as a biomarker for the diagnosis, classification and management of DED.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19522,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.13373\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.13373","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评估被诊断为干眼症(DED)的患者的体征和症状,并将其分为干眼症(DE)组,以便找到一种新的生物标志物,对DED进行准确诊断、管理和分类:这项横断面观察研究包括 71 名 DED 受试者。采用眼表疾病指数(OSDI)、视觉质量(QoV)问卷、最佳矫正距离视力(VA)、功能性视力(FVA)对主观症状、视觉质量和 DE 征兆进行评估、对比敏感度 (CS)、高阶和低阶角膜像差(分别为 HOA 和 LOA)、泪液破裂时间 (TBUT)、睑板腺功能障碍 (MGD)、Schirmer 测试、角膜染色、睑板腺上皮病变 (LWE) 和睑板腺造影。根据干眼症的严重程度,采用聚类分析法将参与者分为三组,即轻度组(17 人,55.8 ± 15.4 岁)、中度组(41 人,63.5 ± 10.6 岁)和重度组(13 人,65.0 ± 12.0 岁)。根据眼表体征制定了新的干眼症严重程度指数(DESI),并评估了该指数与症状、视觉质量和体征之间的关联。组间比较采用 Kruskal-Wallis 和 Chi-squared 检验。此外,还进行了斯皮尔曼相关分析:结果:DESI 基于三种 DE 征兆测试:结果:DESI 基于三种 DE 征兆测试:TBUT、Schirmer 测试和 MGD。DESI 在不同组别之间存在明显差异:轻度干燥对中度干燥(p 结论:DESI 是一项很好的诊断工具:DESI 作为诊断、分类和管理 DED 的生物标志物具有良好的性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Development of a dry eye index as a new biomarker of dry eye disease.

Purpose: To evaluate signs and symptoms in patients diagnosed with dry eye disease (DED), divided into dry eye (DE) groups, in order to find a new biomarker that allows an accurate diagnosis, management and classification of DED.

Methods: This cross-sectional, observational study included 71 DED subjects. Subjective symptoms, visual quality and DE signs were assessed using the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), the Quality of Vision (QoV) questionnaire, best corrected distance visual acuity (VA), functional visual acuity (FVA), contrast sensitivity (CS), high- and low-order corneal aberrations (HOA and LOA, respectively), tear break-up time (TBUT), Meibomian Gland Dysfunction (MGD), Schirmer test, corneal staining, lid wiper epitheliopathy (LWE) and meibography. Participants were classified into three groups based on dryness severity using a cluster analysis, i.e., mild (N = 17, 55.8 ± 15.4 years), moderate (N = 41, 63.5 ± 10.6 years) and severe (N = 13, 65.0 ± 12.0). A new Dry Eye Severity Index (DESI) based on ocular surface signs has been developed and its association with symptoms, visual quality and signs was assessed. Comparisons between groups were made using Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-squared tests. Spearman correlation analysis was also performed.

Results: The DESI was based on three tests for DE signs: TBUT, Schirmer test and MGD. The DESI showed significant differences between different pairs of groups: Mild Dryness versus Moderate Dryness (p < 0.001), Mild Dryness versus Severe Dryness (p < 0.001) and Moderate Dryness versus Severe Dryness (p < 0.001). The DESI was significantly correlated with age (rho = -0.30; p = 0.01), OSDI score (rho = -0.32; p = 0.007), QoV score (rho = -0.35; p = 0.003), VA (rho = -0.34; p = 0.003), FVA (rho = -0.38; p = 0.001) and CS (rho = 0.42; p < 0.001) Also, significant differences between the severity groups were found for OSDI and QoV scores, VA, FVA, CS and MGD (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: The DESI has good performance as a biomarker for the diagnosis, classification and management of DED.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
13.80%
发文量
135
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics, first published in 1925, is a leading international interdisciplinary journal that addresses basic and applied questions pertinent to contemporary research in vision science and optometry. OPO publishes original research papers, technical notes, reviews and letters and will interest researchers, educators and clinicians concerned with the development, use and restoration of vision.
期刊最新文献
Refractive development II: Modelling normal and myopic eye growth. What intrinsic factors affect the central corneal thickness? The effect of lens and fitting characteristics upon scleral lens centration. Recommended improvements to the statistical guidelines. Exploring the relationship between 24-2 visual field and widefield optical coherence tomography data across healthy, glaucoma suspect and glaucoma eyes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1