Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31637051›Full record

ArticleJournal of ophthalmology2019

Intense Pulsed Light Therapy with Optimal Pulse Technology as an Adjunct Therapy for Moderate to Severe Blepharitis-Associated Keratoconjunctivitis.

Fang Ruan, Yunxiao Zang, Ruti Sella, Hongshuang Lu, Shang Li, Ke Yang, Tao Jin, Natalie A Afshari, Zhiqiang Pan, Ying Jie

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Fang RuanBeijing Institute of Ophthalmology, Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9386-3774
Yunxiao ZangBeijing Institute of Ophthalmology, Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Beijing, China.
Ruti SellaShiley Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, USA.
Hongshuang LuBeijing Institute of Ophthalmology, Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Beijing, China.
Shang LiBeijing Institute of Ophthalmology, Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1697-6708
Ke YangBeijing Institute of Ophthalmology, Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Beijing, China.
Tao JinBeijing Institute of Ophthalmology, Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Beijing, China.
Natalie A AfshariShiley Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, USA.
Zhiqiang PanBeijing Institute of Ophthalmology, Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0302-0181
Ying JieBeijing Institute of Ophthalmology, Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2649-8241

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the intense pulsed light (IPL) therapy with optimal pulse technology (OPT, M22™, Lumenis, USA) as an adjunct therapy for the prevention of recurrences in moderate to severe blepharokeratoconjunctivitis (BKC).

methodsThis open-label nonrandomized clinical trial evaluated 33 patients diagnosed with BKC. Twenty-one patients received four bilateral OPT therapy sessions with Meibomian gland expression (MGX) (treatment group), and 11 patients received MGX alone (controls). This trial was initiated after a four-week pharmacotherapy for BKC in both groups and was scheduled at four-week intervals. Efficacy outcome measures included meibum quality, Meibomian gland (MG) secretion function, eyelid margin signs, corneal fluorescein staining (CFS) score, noninvasive keratography breakup time (NIKBUT), ocular surface disease index (OSDI) score, Schirmer I test (SIT), classification of tear film lipid layer (TFLL), and Meibomian gland dropout (MGDR). Safety outcome measures included visual acuity, intraocular pressure, eye structure damage, and facial skin appearance at each visit.

resultsQuality of meibum, MG expressibility, eyelid margin signs, and OSDI score showed a statistically significant greater improvement in the treatment group after one to three treatment sessions, compared to controls (

conclusionsIPL is a safe and effective adjuvant treatment for BKC and possibly more effective in reducing eyelid margin inflammation and prevents recurrences than MGX alone. This trial is registered with ChiCTR-ONN-17013864.

Identifiers

PMID31637051
PMCPMC6766164

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.