Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34045848›Full record

ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2021

Combined Intense Pulsed Light and Low-Level Light Therapy for the Treatment of Dry Eye: A Retrospective Before-After Study with One-Year Follow-Up.

Miguel Angel Pérez-Silguero, David Pérez-Silguero, Amado Rivero-Santana, Maria Inmaculada Bernal-Blasco, Pablo Encinas-Pisa

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Miguel Angel Pérez-SilgueroDepartment of Ophthalmology, La Paloma Hospital, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Canary Islands, Spain.
David Pérez-SilgueroDepartment of Ophthalmology, Pérez-Silguero Ophthalmologic Clinic, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Canary Islands, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0805-6290
Amado Rivero-SantanaDepartment of Health Technology Assessment, Fundación Canaria Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Canarias (FIISC), Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Canary Islands, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-5067-3196
Maria Inmaculada Bernal-BlascoDepartment of Community and Family Medicine, Primary Care Center of Cuevas Torres, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Canary Islands, Spain.
Pablo Encinas-PisaDepartment of Ophthalmology, La Paloma Hospital, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Canary Islands, Spain.
Hospital La Paloma · ESFundación Canaria de Investigación Sanitaria · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess the effectiveness of a combination of intense pulsed light and low-level light therapy (IPL/LLLT) for the treatment of dry eye. STUDY

designRetrospective before-after single-center clinical study. MATERIALS AND

methodsPatients diagnosed with dry eye, refractory to conventional treatment, underwent four sessions of combined IPL/LLLT over 3 months. The Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire, non-invasive breakup time (NIBUT), tear film osmolarity and meniscus height were measured 6 months before intervention, at baseline, post-intervention (3 months), 9 and 15 months.

resultsNIBUT, osmolarity and meniscus height significantly worsened during the 6 months before treatment, whereas symptoms did not change. OSDI scores significantly improved at post-intervention (MD = -44.0, 95% CI -38.1, -50.0), and then increased again until the at last follow-up, but still significantly different from baseline (MD = -30.0, 95% CI -23.4, -36.8). The three clinical signs showed a similar pattern, with one-year improvements of 3.6 seconds for the NIBUT (95% CI 3.1, 4.2, p <0.001), 28 mOsm/L for osmolarity (95% CI 23.6, 32.4, p <0.001) and 0.03 mm for meniscus height (95% CI 0.02, 0.04, p <0.001). No adverse effects were observed.

conclusionIPL/LLLT is safe and produces an important reduction in symptoms and signs of dry eye disease, still relevant one year after the end of treatment in a sample with high symptoms' severity. Therefore, it represents a promising treatment option for patients who do not improve with conventional treatment. Randomized trials are needed to determine the added benefit provided by LLLT.

Indexed as

dry eyeintense pulsed lightlow-level light therapymeibomian gland dysfunctionretrospective study

Identifiers

PMID34045848
PMCPMC8149274
OpenAlexW3163100299

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.