ArticleCureus2025
Effects of Intense Pulsed Light Treatment on Dry Eye Disease After Keratorefractive Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the therapeutic outcome of intense pulsed light (IPL) treatment in individuals with dry eye disease (DED) who received previous keratorefractive surgery (KRS).
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted, and individuals who received IPL treatment were enrolled. Then, the individuals were categorized according to whether they underwent KRS, with a total of 11 and 35 eyes enrolled in the KRS and non-KRS groups, respectively. The primary outcomes were non-invasive tear break-up time (NITBUT), the Schirmer I test, ocular surface staining, and DED symptoms. A generalized linear model was used to evaluate the difference in treatment outcomes between the two groups.
resultsSix months after the IPL treatment, the post-treatment NITBUT was significantly higher in the non-KRS group than the KRS group (P < 0.001). Regarding the trend of DED improvement, NITBUT (P < 0.001) and ocular surface staining (P = 0.001) presented a better improvement in the non-KRS group. In regard to pre-treatment risk factors for poor response after IPL treatment, low NITBUT, low TMH, high ocular surface staining, and multiple DED-related symptoms correlated to poor treatment outcome in the KRS population (all P < 0.05). On the other hand, low NITBUT and high ocular surface staining were associated with poor treatment outcome in the non-KRS population (both P < 0.05).
conclusionsIndividuals with DED that previously underwent KRS presented a lower NITBUT and ocular surface staining recovery after IPL treatment compared to the non-KRS DED individuals, and KRS individuals have more risk factors for poor outcomes after IPL. Alternative DED treatment may be considered for the population with previous KRS.
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.