ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Comparison of Intense Pulsed Light Therapy on Patients with Meibomian Gland Dysfunction Using AQUA CEL and M22 Devices.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tear film and meibomian gland parameters associated with the effectiveness of intense pulsed light therapy for meibomian gland dysfunction.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Layer-by-layer tear film measurement in patients with dry eye and meibomian gland dysfunction.International journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Comparative Analysis of Intense Pulsed Light Therapy in Patients with Meibomian Gland Dysfunction, with and Without Glaucoma Medication.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Long-Term Impacts of Intense Pulsed Light Therapy on Ocular Surface Health and Tear Film Dynamics in Patients with Dry Eye Disease: Detailed Analysis and Observations Over a 1-Year Follow-Up Period.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2024Article
- Different Number of Sessions of Intense Pulsed Light and Meibomian Gland Expression Combination Therapy for Meibomian Gland Dysfunction.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2022Article
- Current practices and considerations in intense pulsed light therapy for meibomian gland dysfunction.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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of Intense Pulsed Light (IPL) therapy for meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) using the new AQUA CEL (AC, Jeisys) device and the traditional M22 (Lumenis) device. A total of 59 eyes of 59 patients with MGD (12 men and 47 women, mean age 49 ± 12 years) were enrolled. They randomly received four sessions of IPL therapy every three weeks either with AC (30 eyes) or M22 (29 eyes). Standard Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness (SPEED) questionnaire score, noninvasive breakup time (NIBUT), lid margin abnormalities, corneal and conjunctival fluorescein staining, fluorescein breakup time (FBUT), Schirmer’s test, meiboscore and meibum grade were evaluated before treatment and one month after treatment. Before IPL, no significant differences were seen in age, gender, or measured parameters between the AC and M22 groups (p > 0.05, respectively). SPEED score, NIBUT, lid margin abnormalities, fluorescein staining, FBUT, and meibum grade improved significantly in both groups after IPL compared to before IPL (p < 0.001, respectively). There were no significant differences in measured parameters between the two groups after IPL (p > 0.05, respectively). IPL therapy with AC and M22 devices has been shown to be equally effective for the treatment of MGD.
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.