ArticleOman journal of ophthalmology
Comparison of a single-dose vectored thermal pulsation procedure with 5-day course of daily oral azithromycin for meibomian gland dysfunction.
Article in Oman journal of ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacological, Natural and Emerging Therapies for Meibomian Gland Dysfunction: A Review.Drugs · 2026Review
- LipiFlow and the Transformation of Therapeutic Meibomian Gland Expression into Routine Clinical Practice.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims at comparing the efficacy of a single-dose vectored thermal pulsation (VTP) procedure versus 5 days once daily oral azithromycin in patients with meibomian gland disease (MGD) by measuring the symptomatology and ocular surface parameters. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study was conducted as a prospective, nonrandomized, comparative study over a period of 17 months at a tertiary care center. In this study, 60 patients with MGD were enrolled after they gave their informed consent according to the inclusion-exclusion criteria and were divided into two groups, 30 each in the azithromycin group and the VTP, i.e., the LipiFlow group. One group was treated with oral azithromycin for 5 days and the other group was given LipiFlow treatment. Postprocedure, follow-up was done for 2 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months.
resultsA statistically significant difference was noted in the score Standard Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness questionnaire after 3 months of treatment in both the azithromycin and LipiFlow group (
conclusionBoth oral azithromycin and LipiFlow treatment are effective in patients with MGD. The effect of LipiFlow treatment lasted longer as compared to azithromycin. The efficacy of azithromycin in resolving the symptoms of MGD was greater compared to LipiFlow in the initial 2 weeks of treatment. However, the effect deteriorated in the subsequent follow-up at 3 months and 6 months.
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.