[Eyelid hygiene in preparing dry eye patients for cataract surgical treatment].

Autor:	Sakhnov SN; Kuban State Medical University, Krasnodar, Russia.; Krasnodar branch of S.N. Fyodorov National Medical Research Center «MNTK «Eye Microsurgery», Krasnodar, Russia., Yanchenko SV; Kuban State Medical University, Krasnodar, Russia.; Scientific Research Institution - S.V. Ochapovsky Regional Clinical Hospital No. 1, Krasnodar, Russia., Malyshev AV; Kuban State Medical University, Krasnodar, Russia.; Scientific Research Institution - S.V. Ochapovsky Regional Clinical Hospital No. 1, Krasnodar, Russia., Dashina VV; Scientific Research Institution - S.V. Ochapovsky Regional Clinical Hospital No. 1, Krasnodar, Russia., Karapetov GY; Scientific Research Institution - S.V. Ochapovsky Regional Clinical Hospital No. 1, Krasnodar, Russia., Sergienko AA; Scientific Research Institution - S.V. Ochapovsky Regional Clinical Hospital No. 1, Krasnodar, Russia., Zakaraya TG; Kuban State Medical University, Krasnodar, Russia.
Jazyk:	ruština
Zdroj:	Vestnik oftalmologii [Vestn Oftalmol] 2020; Vol. 136 (6. Vyp. 2), pp. 177-182.
DOI:	10.17116/oftalma2020136062177
Abstrakt:	Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of complex treatment, including eyelid hygiene, on the condition of ocular surface in dry eye patients before cataract surgery. Material and Methods: The study included 56 female age-related cataract patients (64±4.3 years old) with dry eye caused by Meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD). The main group patients ( n =28) underwent eyelid hygiene therapy (2 times a day, 1 month) that involved Blefarogel cleansing, Blefarolotion, Blefarogel-1. The main and control ( n =28) group patients performed (during the month): «fat-water» type nanoemulsion instillation (3 times a day); preservative free vitamin-A application (at night). Methods included dry eye symptoms assessment (OSDI scale); TBUT; Shirmer-1 test; lissamine green vital staining with xerosis indicator calculation (van Bijsterveld scale); "lid wipers" symptom evaluation; Norn compression test. Statistical evaluation included: mean and standard deviation calculation ( M±s ); significance of differences assessment (Mann-Whitney U -test; Wilcoxon's T-test). Results: The main group patients (artificial tear, keratoprotection, eyelid hygiene) showed a statistically significant more pronounced decrease in OSDI (from 33.2±3.1 points to 15.2±1.8 points) and a significantly more pronounced increase in TBUT (from 4.8±0.5 s to 6.9±0.4 s) than in control group patients (artificial tear, keratoprotection; respectively, from 32.7±3.2 to 20.8±3.1 points and from 4.85±0.5 to 5.8±0.4 s; p <0.05). Apparently, this was associated with a significantly more pronounced relief of the MGD signs in main group patients (from 2.1±0.1 to 1.1±0.2 points; p <0.05) as a result of eyelid hygiene. In the control group, the dynamics of MGD severity (from 2.08±0.3 to 2.11±0.5 points) was statistically insignificant. Conclusion: Eyelid hygiene (based on Blefarogel cleansing, Blefarolotion, Blefarogel-1) increases the effectiveness of dry eye treatment in MGD patients, compared with isolated tear substitution and keratoprotection.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu