MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399699482 · doi:10.1007/s40123-024-00976-1

Vectored Thermal Pulsation as a Treatment for Meibomian Gland Dysfunction: A Review Spanning 15 Years

2024· review· en· W4399699482 on OpenAlexaff
Caroline A. Blackie, David Murakami, Eric D. Donnenfeld, Heather S. Oliff

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmology and Therapy · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsJohnson & Johnson (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeibomian glandMedicineMassageAdverse effectEyelidSurgeryAlternative medicineInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The LipiFlow Thermal Pulsation System received its first marketing clearance for the treatment of meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) 13 years ago. Since then, the evidence evaluating the effectiveness and safety of LipiFlow as a treatment for MGD has grown significantly. The objective of this comprehensive review was to summarize all clinical reports evaluating the effectiveness and safety of LipiFlow over the past 15 years. The literature was systematically reviewed, and 55 unique articles had subjective (patient-reported outcomes) and objective (meibomian gland function, tear production, and ocular staining) outcomes for extraction. Data were collected from 2101 patients and 3521 eyes treated with LipiFlow. Of these, effectiveness was evaluated in 2041 patients and 3401 eyes, and safety was evaluated in 1448 patients and 2443 eyes. Taken together, the studies demonstrate that a single 12-min treatment with LipiFlow safely improves signs and symptoms of MGD and associated evaporative dry eye disease (DED), and the benefits persist up to 3 years in some cases. The findings are corroborated by multiple meta-analyses and consensus guidelines. While some studies showed that daily eyelid hygiene, warm compress, and/or massage had a similar benefit to a single LipiFlow, these treatments were limited by inconvenience, discomfort, and non-compliance. The majority of studies evaluating safety reported no discomfort or pain associated with LipiFlow treatment, which supports the patient acceptability of LipiFlow therapy. All adverse events (AEs) related to LipiFlow were transient, non-vision-threatening, and did not require treatment. No studies reported serious AEs. The data obtained from 55 studies conducted globally overwhelmingly show that LipiFlow is effective and safe for the treatment of MGD and associated evaporative DED. The conclusions are supported by the diversity of the patient populations (geography, race, disease severity, and diagnosis), the large population treated with LipiFlow, the meta-analyses, and that this review analyzed all published clinical studies to date.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmology and TherapySame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207