We investigated whether there is a difference in the treatment effect and pain during the treatment of meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) with intense pulsed-light (IPL) between new light guide and conventional light guide. Methods:We retrospectively reviewed medical records of 85 patients (170 eyes) who underwent IPL treatment of the upper and lower eyelids 3 times, at 3-week intervals, for MGD. Patients treated with the 6-mm or 8 • 15-mm cylindrical light guide were designated as group A or group B, respectively. The ocular surface disease index (OSDI), dry eye (DE), and MGD parameters were obtained before the first and after the third IPL treatments. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores were obtained at every IPL treatment. OSDI, DE, and MGD parameters and VAS scores were compared between the groups.Results: VAS scores at the first, second, and third IPL treatments were lower in group A than in group B. OSDI, DE, and MGD parameters were improved after 3 IPL treatments in both groups. There were no significant differences in OSDI, DE symptoms, and MGD parameters between before the first IPL treatment and after the third IPL treatment between the groups.Conclusions: Using the new 6-mm cylindrical light guide for IPL treatment in patients with MGD induced less pain during treatment and had similar treatment effects to the conventional 8 • 15-mm light guide. The new 6-mm cylindrical light guide can be useful when treating patients with dark or hyperpigmented skin and for pediatric patients with low compliance.

Simultaneous correction of lower eyelid retraction using thin AlloDerm during swinging eyelid orbital decompression maximizes improvement of lower eyelid retraction compared with concurrent inferior retractor recession.

Purpose: To compare dry eye disease parameters between small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and laser subepithelial keratomileusis (LASEK). Methods: This prospective, nonrandomized study included 39 eyes of 39 patients who underwent SMILE (n = 19) and LASEK (n = 20). Dry eye disease parameters included Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), tear breakup time, Schirmer I test (SIT) value, corneal esthesiometry result, tear meniscus area, meibomian gland evaluation result, lipid layer thickness, and blink rate. Evaluations were performed before surgery and at 1 and 6 months after surgery. Results: Compared with the LASEK group, the SMILE group showed lower corneal esthesiometry values at 1 month and higher OSDI scores and lower SIT values at 6 months after surgery. The SMILE group showed significantly higher OSDI scores at 1 and 6 months after surgery than before, but significantly lower OSDI scores at 6 months than at 1 month after surgery. Both groups showed significantly decreased corneal sensitivity at 1 month after surgery, which increased to the preoperative level 6 months after surgery. The change in OSDI scores at 1 month after surgery positively correlated with changes in the total and partial blink rates, whereas the change in corneal sensitivity at 1 month after surgery negatively correlated with the total and partial blink rates. Conclusions: Both SMILE and LASEK groups showed temporary decreases in corneal sensitivity, which recovered to baseline levels. Although subjective symptoms worsened after SMILE, SIT values improved after LASEK. Compared with SMILE, LASEK yielded better results regarding subjective symptoms, tear production, and corneal sensitivity.