SynthesisMedicine2025
Efficacy and safety of perfluorohexyloctane (PFHO) in patients with dry eye disease (DED) due to meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD): Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2025. 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.
- Highlighting Ophthalmic Adverse Effects Associated with Isotretinoin.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Redefining Dry Eye Disease Management: Emerging Pharmacologic and Device-Based Therapies in the Era of Precision Care: A Narrative Review.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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDry eye disease (DED) associated with meibomian gland dysfunction lacks a conclusive treatment, placing existing solutions under the burden of side effects and limitations. This study seeks to assess the efficacy and safety of perfluorohexyloctane (PFHO) in treating DED associated with meibomian gland dysfunction.
methodsA thorough search encompassing Medline, Cochrane Central Register, and Google Scholar was conducted until September 15, 2023. Four randomized controlled trials were assessed for PFHO's safety and efficacy. Studies were managed with EndNote and Excel for dual-phase screening by reviewers. Bias risk was evaluated with the risk of bias 2.0 Cochrane tool, and comparative outcomes were synthesized using RevMan software.
resultsIn this meta-analysis, we pooled data from 4 randomized controlled trials involving 1754 patients. Significant reductions were observed in total corneal fluorescein staining score mean difference = -0.87 (95% CI -1.06, -0.68, P < .00001), eye dryness score mean difference = -7.73 (95% CI -9.17, -6.29, P < .00001), and central Corneal Fluorescein Staining score risk ratios (RR) = 5.11 (95% CI: 1.75-14.93, P = .003). Subgroup analysis highlighted increasing differences over time, notably at week 8. Safety analysis showed decreased risk of eye pain RR = 0.70 (95% CI: 0.27, 1.80, P = .46) and blurred vision RR = 5.11 (95% CI: 1.75, 14.93, P = .003) with PFHO. There was no significant difference noted in serious adverse events RR = 1.38 (95% CI: 0.25, 7.60, P = .71), ocular TEAS RR = 1.05 (95% CI: 0.81, 1.37, P = .69) and non-ocular TEAS RR = 1.02 (95% CI: 0.75, 1.40, P = .89).
conclusionPFHO marks a novel treatment for DED, targeting tear evaporation with its unique water-free, preservative-free preparation. It has proved to be highly effective in alleviating eye dryness and associated symptoms. While minor side effects are seen in a small subset of patients, the overall safety is promising. Further long-term and larger sample size studies will offer a more thorough understanding of this new drug.
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.