首页> 外文期刊>Investigative ophthalmology & visual science >Heating Wet Chamber Goggles (Blephasteam??) In Meibomian Gland Dysfunction Unresponsive To Warm Compress Treatment
【24h】

Heating Wet Chamber Goggles (Blephasteam??) In Meibomian Gland Dysfunction Unresponsive To Warm Compress Treatment

机译:睑板腺功能不全的热湿室护目镜(Blephasteam ??)对热敷治疗无反应

获取原文
           

摘要

Purpose: : To evaluate the safety and efficacy of wet chamber warming goggles (Blephasteam??) in patients with meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) unresponsive to warm compress treatment. Methods: : We consecutively enrolled 15 adult patients with low-delivery, non-cicatricial, MGD unresponsive to warm compress treatment. We considered unresponsive the patients who showed no OSDI or BUT improvement after 3 weeks of treatment with warm compresses used twice a day during 10 minutes. The patients were instructed to use Blephasteam?? (Laboratoires Thea, Clermont-Ferrand, France) twice a day during 10 minutes, with a following lid massage. Outcome measures were assessed in the worst eye (lower BUT) at baseline and after 3 weeks, including OSDI score, BUT, corneal fluorescein staining, MGs expressibility, Schirmer test. In vivo laser scanning confocal microscopy (LSCM) was used to study MGs in the lower eyelid, quantifying the mean acinar units diameter (manually measured as the longest axis of the acinar unit), acinar units area (calculated automatically after manual demarcation of the boundary), density of MGs (manually marked inside each 400x400 ?μm frame and calculated automatically with the Cell Count software, Heidelberg Engineering GmbH, Dortmund, Germany), diameter of glandular orifices (manually marked as the longest axis of orifice); meibum secretion reflectivity; inhomogeneous appearance of interstice and wall of acinar units. Results: : After 3 weeks of treatment, mean OSDI score decreased from 37.7?±17.5 to 23.2?±12.4 and mean BUT decreased from 6.0?±2.5 to 8.4?±2.0 (P0.05, paired samples T-test). LSCM showed decrease of mean acinar diameter (from 105.3?±19.5 to 88.2?±23.6; P0.05) and area (from 8912?±2205 to 6876?±1418; P0.05). Conclusions: : Eyelid warming is the mainstay of the clinical treatment of MGD and its poor results may be often due to lack of compliance and standardization. Blephasteam?? wet chamber warming goggles are a promising alternative to classical warm compress treatment, potentially able to improve the weaknesses of the "warming approach".
机译:目的:评价湿室加温护目镜(Blephasteam ??)在对热敷治疗无反应的睑板腺功能障碍(MGD)患者中的安全性和有效性。方法::我们连续招募了15位对热敷治疗无反应的低分娩,非瘢痕性,MGD成人患者。我们认为对患者无反应的患者在用10分钟每天两次的热敷治疗3周后未显示OSDI或BUT改善。指示患者使用Blephasteam ?? (Laboratoires Thea,法国Clermont-Ferrand,法国)每天两次,每次10分钟,然后进行眼睑按摩。在基线和3周后在最坏的眼睛(较低的BUT)中评估结果指标,包括OSDI评分,BUT,角膜荧光素染色,MGs表达,Schirmer试验。使用体内激光扫描共聚焦显微镜(LSCM)研究下眼睑的MG,量化平均腺泡单位直径(手动测量为腺泡单位的最长轴),腺泡单位面积(手动划定边界后自动计算) ),MG的密度(手动标记在每个400x400μm框架内,并使用德国汉特堡工程技术有限公司的细胞计数软件自动计算),腺孔的直径(手动标记为最长的孔轴);睑板分泌物反射率;间隙和腺泡单元壁的外观不均匀。结果:治疗3周后,平均OSDI评分从37.7±17.5降至23.2±12.4,平均BUT从6.0±2.5降至8.4±2.0(P <0.05,配对样本T检验)。 LSCM的平均腺泡直径(从105.3?±19.5降至88.2?±23.6; P <0.05)和面积(从8912?±2205降至6876?±1418; P <0.05)减小。结论:眼睑加温是MGD临床治疗的主要方法,其不良结果通常可能是由于缺乏依从性和标准化。 Blephasteam ??湿室加温护目镜是经典暖敷治疗的有希望的替代方法,有可能改善“加温方法”的弱点。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号