Intraductal meibomian gland probing and its efficacy in the treatment of meibomian gland dysfunction

Magno, Morten Schjerven; Moschowits, Emily; Arita, Reiko; Vehof, Jelle; Utheim, Tor Paaske

doi:10.1016/j.survophthal.2020.11.005

Cited by 9 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Table 1 summarizes the results of independent peer-reviewed studies 3-5 , 7–11 , 13 , 14 included in the 2021 review. 16 …”

Section: Results From Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, the baseline of each study, at a minimum, is prior failed treatment. (Suggesting otherwise by the review authors 16 is a significant error and oversight in their analysis.) C Note the short duration of many of the studies.…”

Section: Results From Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ten published peer reviewed studies from the 2021 review 16 are included in our review. [3][4][5][7][8][9][10][11]13,14 SLM, the author and inventor of MGP 1 did not provide any guidance or input toward these studies.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One previous literature review summarized study results of a subset of these studies, namely those available in English. 16 However, the review had several significant limitations. 17 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…15 One previous literature review summarized study results of a subset of these studies, namely those available in English. 16 However, the review had several significant limitations. 17 Our paper provides fresh insights from the inventor and developer of MGP into the reviewed MGP research studies and dispels misconceptions that have entered the literature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Review of Literature on Intraductal Meibomian Gland Probing with Insights from the Inventor and Developer: Fundamental Concepts and Misconceptions

Warren¹,

Maskin²

2023

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Obstructive Meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) affects millions of patients around the world. Its effective treatment with intraductal meibomian gland probing (MGP), was first reported in 2010. Since then, MGP has provided relief to thousands of patients globally suffering with refractory MGD. The purpose of Meibomian gland probing is restoring the integrity of the gland’s central duct by entering the gland through the natural orifice, releasing fixed obstruction thought to be periductal fibrosis, thereby establishing and/or confirming the patency of the duct, and concurrently equilibrating intraductal pressure as well as promoting gland functionality with meibum production. There may or may not be immediate secretion of meibum upon successful restoration of ductal integrity depending on the gland’s state of function and degree of atrophy. One double-blind placebo-controlled study has been conducted and, with the accumulated evidence of over 12 other peer reviewed articles in the scientific literature, overwhelmingly indicates that MGP is a safe and effective treatment for the MGD patient refractory to prior standard care and as a first-line treatment. This paper describes relevant fundamental concepts, dispels commonly held misconceptions, and provides an objective review of the current understanding and effectiveness of MGP for the treatment of obstructive MGD. Our analysis will better equip clinicians to draw informed conclusions about both subjective and objective findings reported in MGP studies and researchers to design future robust studies that provide meaningful results.

show abstract

“…Table 1 summarizes the results of independent peer-reviewed studies 3-5 , 7–11 , 13 , 14 included in the 2021 review. 16 …”

Section: Results From Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Results From Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One previous literature review summarized study results of a subset of these studies, namely those available in English. 16 However, the review had several significant limitations. 17 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations