Effect of using a combination of lid wipes, eye drops, and omega-3 supplements on meibomian gland functionality in patients with lipid deficient/evaporative dry eye.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of using a combination treatment approach consisting of lipid emulsion eye drops, eyelid cleansing wipes, and omega-3 vitamin supplements compared with warm compresses in improving meibomian gland functionality in patients with lipid-deficient/evaporative dry eye disease (LDDE). METHODS: This single-center, open-label, investigator-masked, randomized study enrolled patients aged ≥18 years, clinically diagnosed with LDDE defined as having ≤6 functional meibomian glands [meibomian gland yielding liquid secretion (MGYLS)] and positive for dry eye symptoms at screening. Patients were randomized to receive either the combination treatment (lipid emulsion eye drops, omega-3 supplements, and lid hygiene with eyelid wipes) or to apply warm, wet compresses once daily, 8 minutes per day, for 3 months. Meibomian gland functionality (number of MGYLS; primary outcome) and patient-reported subjective assessments (SPEED and OSDI questionnaires; secondary outcomes) were evaluated. Adverse events (AEs) and visual acuity were assessed as safety endpoints. RESULTS: Mean patient age was 41.7 years (n = 26; n = 13 per group). Mean ± SD number of MGYLS was not statistically significantly different between groups at baseline (combination treatment, 3.5 ± 1.5; warm compresses, 4.2 ± 1.4, P > 0.5), and was significantly greater with combination treatment versus warm compresses after 3 months of treatment (9.3 ± 2.7 vs. 4.7 ± 2.3; P = 0.006). Dry eye symptoms were significantly improved in both groups at all follow-up visits. Two AEs unrelated to treatment were reported; the BCVA was unchanged from baseline in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The combination treatment regimen resulted in significant improvement in meibomian gland functionality and dry eye symptoms. No safety issues were observed.

The effect of two novel lubricant eye drops on tear film lipid layer thickness in subjects with dry eye symptoms.

PURPOSE: Because the lipid layer of the tear film is recognized as a critical component in dry eye disease, this study was designed to determine if a single eye drop of either Soothe or Systane produces a significant increase in lipid layer thickness (LLT) for subjects reporting symptoms indicative of dry eyes. METHODS: A double-blind, internally paired study was performed. A custom-built lipid layer interferometer, enabling characterization of lipid layer interference patterns, was used to quantify baseline LLT (OU) of eligible subjects. Inclusion criteria included: 1) presence of dry eye symptoms and 2) baseline LLT < or =75 nm. Subjects (n = 40) received a single eye drop of Soothe in one eye and a single eye drop of Systane in the contralateral eye. After the instillation of each test drop, LLT was reanalyzed for all subjects. RESULTS: The mean +/- standard error baseline LLT pre-eye drop instillation was 60.0 +/- 1.8 nm for eyes treated with Soothe and 61.5 +/- 1.8 nm for eyes treated with Systane. These means were not significantly different (p > 0.5). The mean LLT for eyes treated with Soothe increased to 124.4 +/- 4.9 nm (p < 0.0001). The mean LLT for eyes treated with Systane increased to 71.3 +/- 2.6 nm (p < 0.0001). The LLT increase from Soothe was significantly greater than that from Systane (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In subjects with symptoms indicative of dry eye states and LLT < or =75 nm, one eye drop of Soothe more than doubled LLT, a 107% mean increase, whereas Systane increased LLT by 16%.

Lid wiper epitheliopathy and dry eye symptoms.

OBJECTIVES: The lid wiper is defined as that portion of the marginal conjunctiva of the upper eyelid that wipes the ocular surface during blinking. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether lid wiper epitheliopathy occurred with patients who reported dry eye symptoms, yet had normal fluorescein breakup time (FBUT) and Schirmer test values and an absence of fluorescein corneal staining. METHODS: One hundred patients were divided into two groups based on the presence or absence of dry eye symptoms, as determined with the Standard Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness questionnaire. Other criteria for admission to both groups were FBUT of 10 seconds or more, Schirmer test value of 10 mm or more, and absence of fluorescein corneal staining. After instillation of fluorescein and rose bengal dyes, the lid wipers of 50 asymptomatic and 50 symptomatic patients were graded for staining from grade 0 (absent) to grade 3 (severe). RESULTS: Of the symptomatic patients, 76% had staining of the lid wiper: 44%, grade 1; 22%, grade 2; and 10%, grade 3. Of the asymptomatic patients, 12% had staining; 8%, grade 1; 4%, grade 2; and 0%, grade 3. The difference in prevalence of lid wiper staining between the symptomatic and asymptomatic groups was significant (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Lid wiper epitheliopathy, diagnosed by staining with fluorescein and rose bengal dyes, is a frequent finding when symptoms of dry eye are experienced in the absence of routine clinical dry eye findings.