Trial reportIndian journal of ophthalmology2019
Oral azithromycin and oral doxycycline for the treatment of Meibomian gland dysfunction: A 9-month comparative case series.
Trial report in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oral antibiotics for chronic blepharitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Mechanisms and Safety of Therapeutic Strategies in Meibomian Gland Dysfunction: A Narrative Review.Ophthalmic research · 2026Review
- A Short-Term Comparative Evaluation of Multiple Treatment Modalities for Meibomian Gland Dysfunction: A Prospective Clinical Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Dry Eye in Diabetes: The Indian Diabetic and Endocrine Eye Diseases (INDEED) Review.TouchREVIEWS in endocrinology · 2024Review
- Oral Azithromycin versus Oral Doxycycline in the Treatment of Meibomian Gland Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- Efficacy of combined doxycycline and intense pulsed light therapy for the management of intractable recurrent chalazion.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Meibomian Gland Dysfunction Clinical Practice Guidelines.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Dry Eye Disease Associated with Meibomian Gland Dysfunction: Focus on Tear Film Characteristics and the Therapeutic Landscape.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Review
- Pulsed Oral Azithromycin vs 6-Week Oral Doxycycline for Moderate to Severe Meibomian Gland Dysfunction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Efficacy of Topical Azithromycin versus Systemic Doxycycline in Treatment of Meibomian Gland Dysfunction.Journal of ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Safety and Feasibility of Low Fluence Intense Pulsed Light for Treating Pediatric Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Blepharitis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Alternative therapies for dry eye disease.Current opinion in ophthalmology · 2021Review
- Dry eye: why artificial tears are not always the answer.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2021Review
- Targeted therapies for meibomian gland dysfunction - The role of antibiotics in meibomian gland dysfunction management.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety profile of oral azithromycin with that of doxycycline over 9 months in patients experiencing failure with conservative and topical treatment for Meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD), to assess recurrence of MGD, and to determine the number of treatments required. Methods: This is a randomized controlled trial with a cross-over design at a tertiary care center. In all, 115 consecutive patients underwent a complete ophthalmological examination before being randomly assigned to oral treatment with doxycline (4 g for 30 days) or azithromycin (1.25 g for 5 days). Patients were evaluated at 3, 6, and 9 months. Therapy was switched or conservative management maintained according to signs and symptoms. Results: In the azithromycin group, 83.25% of the patients were stable after one treatment, 16.5% needed a further one or two treatments (some had previously been switched to doxycycline), and 5.77% did not improve despite treatment. In the doxycycline group, 33.79% of patients were stable after one treatment, 66.21% needed a further one or two treatments (some had previously switched to azithromycin), and 29.41% did not improve despite treatment (P < 0.05). Minimal gastrointestinal adverse effects (nausea, diarrhea, abdominal cramp, and decreased appetite) were reported, mostly unchanged at the follow-up visits. At the first visit, more adverse effects were reported in the doxycycline group (14/51, 24%) than in the azithromycin group (3/52, 6%; P < 0.005). Conclusion: Both antibiotics were effective and safe for treating patients with persistent MGD, although azithromycin was superior when the reduced dose and the shorter course of therapy (5 days vs. 4 weeks) were taken into consideration. Given the chronic nature of the disease and the improvement in some signs with minimal adverse effects, a shorter therapy seems a safer and more logical alternative to longer regimens.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.