Trial reportBMC ophthalmology2019
Clinical results of Intraductal Meibomian gland probing combined with intense pulsed light in treating patients with refractory obstructive Meibomian gland dysfunction: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current application of intense pulsed light for the management of dry eye disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2024Pooled it
- Intense pulsed light (IPL) therapy for the treatment of meibomian gland dysfunction.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Safety and efficacy of a novel intense pulsed light system in patients with meibomian gland dysfunction: a randomized, double-masked, intra-individual controlled study.International ophthalmology · 2025Trial
- Response of tear cytokines following intense pulsed light combined with meibomian gland expression for treating meibomian gland dysfunction-related dry eye.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Trial
- Prospective trial of a 2940 nm Er:YAG laser for the treatment of meibomian gland dysfunction.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2021Trial
- Technological Interventions for Dry Eye Disease: A Systematic Review and Random-Effects Network Meta-analysis of 3-Month Outcomes.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Article
- Mechanisms and Safety of Therapeutic Strategies in Meibomian Gland Dysfunction: A Narrative Review.Ophthalmic research · 2026Review
- A comprehensive analysis of dry eye disease clinical trials (2000-2024): research trends and gaps.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Network meta-analysis of different modalities of intense pulsed light therapy in the treatment of dry eye disease induced by meibomian gland dysfunction.Lasers in medical science · 2025Article
- Intense Pulsed Light Combined with Low Level Blue and Red Light Therapy forClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Impact of dry eye disease treatment on patient quality of life.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Meibomian Gland Probing Stimulates a Proliferative Epithelial Response Resulting in Duct Regeneration.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- Treatment of Dry Eye Disease (DED) in Asia: Strategies for Short Tear Film Breakup Time-Type DED.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- Meibomian Gland Dysfunction Clinical Practice Guidelines.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Intense Pulsed Light Therapy in the Treatment of Dry Eye Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Analysis of Treatment Efficacy of Intense Pulsed Light (M22) for Meibomian Gland Dysfunction with Demodex Mites.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2023Article
- Review of Literature on Intraductal Meibomian Gland Probing with Insights from the Inventor and Developer: Fundamental Concepts and Misconceptions.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Review
- Outcomes of serial sessions of Activa mask combined with intense pulsed light therapy in patients with Meibomian gland dysfunction.BMC ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Meibography guided intraductal meibomian gland probing using real-time infrared video feed.The British journal of ophthalmology · 2020Article
- Therapeutic Instruments Targeting Meibomian Gland Dysfunction.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to optimize the therapeutic regimen for refractory obstructive meibomian gland dysfunction (o-MGD) patients by combining intraductal meibomian gland probing (MGP) and intense pulsed light (IPL) to enhance their positive effects and reduce their limitations.
methodsThis randomized, assessor blind study includes 45 patients (90 eyes) with refractory o-MGD who were divided into 3 groups via allocation concealment: IPL (group I, received an IPL treatment course: 3 times at 3-week intervals), MGP (group II, received MGP one time), and combined MGP-IPL (group III, MGP first followed by an IPL treatment course). Standard Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness score (SPEED), tear break-up time (TBUT), corneal fluorescein staining (CFS), meibum grade, and lid margin finding results were assessed at baseline, 3 weeks after final treatment for groups I and III, 3 and 12 weeks after MGP for group II. Six months after final treatment, the SPEED and willingness to receive any treatment again were also collected for all groups. Paired Wilcoxon, Mann-Whitney U with Bonferroni correction, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for data analysis.
resultsFor all 3 groups, all previously mentioned indexes improved significantly following treatment (P<0.01). MGP-IPL was better than IPL and MGP in terms of post-treatment SPEED, TBUT, meibum grade, and lid telangiectasia (P<0.05/3). Furthermore, the MGP-IPL was better than IPL in terms of lid tenderness and better than MGP in terms of orifice abnormality (P< 0.05/3). Six months later, the SPEED for the MGP-IPL was also significantly lower than other groups (P<0.05/3). Moreover, no patients in the MGP-IPL group expressed the need to be treated again compared to 35.7% or 20% of patients in the IPL or MGP groups, respectively.
conclusionsCompared with IPL or MGP alone, the combination MGP-IPL produced best results in relieving all signs and symptoms and helping patients attain long-lasting symptom relief.
trial registrationhttp://clinicaltrials.gov , ChiCTR1900021273 (retrospectively registered February 9, 2019).
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.