CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03194698Updated Jan 3, 2020Results posted

Efficacy of IPL Treatment of Dry Eye and Ocular Rosacea

An interventional study of Intense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL) and Meibomian Gland Expression in Ocular Rosacea and Dry Eye, sponsored by Mayo Clinic. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 100 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-01-03.

Sponsored by Mayo Clinic · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
20
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 100 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Dry eye disease (DED) is a common condition that causes ocular discomfort and reduces visual acuity. The two categories of DED are evaporative dry eye and aqueous deficient dry eye. Both conditions can involve pathology of the meibomian glands, lacrimal glands, lids, tear film and surface cells. Meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) is the leading cause of evaporative dry eye and contributes to aqueous deficient dry eye. The goal of MGD therapy is to provide long term improvement of symptoms for patients by improving the quality of meibum, increasing meibum flow, improving tear film stability and decreasing inflammation.

Commonly used therapies include preservative free drops, omega-3 fatty acid supplementation, topical cyclosporine, serum tears, topical azithromycin, oral doxycycline, moisture chambers, intraductal probing, lib margin exfoliation, automated thermal pulsation, warm compresses, among other. Despite this variety of symptoms, patients often do not experience complete or long term relief of symptoms.

Forced meibomian gland expression (MGX) has been shown to be an effective method of rehabilitating meibomian glands and improving dry eye symptoms. The eyelid margins are forcefully compressed to express gland contents. Research has shown improvement in patient symptoms with the use of MGX.

Intense pulsed light (IPL) have been used in dermatology to treat various conditions. Patients with DED who have tried other therapies and found no relief, often resort to IPL as a last resort. Research has shown IPL alone may be effective in improving patient symptoms. In addition, such studies have failed to show significant adverse events with the use of IPL.

Here, we propose a prospective, randomized, case controlled clinical pilot study to examine the efficacy for both subjective and objective measures. 20 patients with DED will be recruited and will be randomly assigned to one of two groups: MGX alone or MGX with IPL. Objective measures will include tear cytokine levels, impression cytology, meibography, tear osmolarity and others. Subjective measures will include quality of life screening tools.

We hypothesize that the use of MGX with IPL will lead to greater improvement in subjective dry eye symptoms and objective measures. Given the lack of adverse effects reported in the literature, we do not anticipate adverse effects in our study.

Rochester staff Drs. Faustch and Bourne are providing clinical research advice but have no contact with subjects or biospecimens.

02

Conditions studied

  • Ocular Rosacea
  • Dry Eye

Keywords

  • Intense Pulsed Light
03

In context

Dry Eye Syndromes

1,292 studies on the registry are indexed under Dry Eye Syndromes; 192 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 20 is below the median of 60 across 1,077 interventional studies indexed under Dry Eye Syndromes.

Browse Dry Eye Syndromes studies →

Lead sponsor

Mayo Clinic is the lead sponsor of 3,218 studies on the registry; 670 are open to participants now.

Of its 445 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 313 (70%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 100 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Eligibility criteria

Dry eye of moderate severity with ocular rosacea diagnosed by ophthalmologist. No contraindications of severe ocular surface disease or inability to be safely treated with IPL.

Dry eye symptoms must be alleviated with topical anesthetic. No GVHD, Stevens Johnson, active allergic conjunctivitis or other conjunctivitis, alkali burn history.

Subjects must have at least 50% meibomian glands viable on meibography and no new treatments for dry eye in the past 6 months.

Contact lenses and refractive surgery is okay.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
20 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    MGX and Intense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL)

    Treatment with 4 visits and 4 treatments of IPL and Meibomian Gland Expression (MGX)

    Device: Intense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL) · Procedure: Meibomian Gland Expression

  • Active comparator
    Meibomian Gland Expression (MGX)

    Treatment with 4 visits and 4 treatments of MGX only

    Procedure: Meibomian Gland Expression

Interventions

  • DeviceIntense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL)

    IPL is a high-intensity light source consisting of visible light in the wavelength range of 515-1200 nm, that is aimed at the eyes. Treatments are spaced four to six weeks apart for a total of 4 treatments.

  • ProcedureMeibomian Gland Expression

    Manual expression of the meibomian glands by placing the thumb against the lid margin and press firmly against the eyeball to determine the percentage of meibomian pores that are blocked. This assessment is performed on both the upper and lower lid of each eye.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) Symptom Survey Score

    Symptom survey on severity of dry eye symptoms. This 12-item questionnaire assesses dry eye symptoms and the effects it has on vision-related function in the past week of the patient's life. The questionnaire has 3 subscales: ocular symptoms, vision-related function, and environmental triggers. Patients rate their responses on a 0 to 4 scale with 0 corresponding to "none of the time" and 4 corresponding to "all of the time." A final score is calculated which ranges from 0 to 100 with scores 0 to 12 representing normal, 13 to 22 representing mild dry eye disease, 23 to 32 representing moderate dry eye disease, and greater than 33 representing severe dry eye disease.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change in Meibomian Glands Open - Right Lower Lid

    The count of manual expression of the meibomian glands. A thumb is placed against the lid margin and press firmly against the eyeball to determine the percentage of meibomian pores that are blocked. This assessment is performed on both the upper and lower lid of each eye.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 months

  2. Change in Meibomian Glands Open - Left Lower Lid

    The count of manual expression of the meibomian glands. A thumb is placed against the lid margin and press firmly against the eyeball to determine the percentage of meibomian pores that are blocked. This assessment is performed on both the upper and lower lid of each eye.

    Time frame: 3 months

07

Results

Posted Jan 3, 2020

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneMGX and Intense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL)Meibomian Gland Expression (MGX)
Started1010
Completed1010
Not completed00

Outcome measures

PrimaryChange in Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) Symptom Survey Score

Symptom survey on severity of dry eye symptoms. This 12-item questionnaire assesses dry eye symptoms and the effects it has on vision-related function in the past week of the patient's life. The questionnaire has 3 subscales: ocular symptoms, vision-related function, and environmental triggers. Patients rate their responses on a 0 to 4 scale with 0 corresponding to "none of the time" and 4 corresponding to "all of the time." A final score is calculated which ranges from 0 to 100 with scores 0 to 12 representing normal, 13 to 22 representing mild dry eye disease, 23 to 32 representing moderate dry eye disease, and greater than 33 representing severe dry eye disease.

Time frame:
baseline, 3 months
Reported as:
Mean · percentage of change in OSDI score
Change in Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) Symptom Survey Score
percentage of change in OSDI scoreMGX and Intense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL)Meibomian Gland Expression (MGX)
Change in Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) Symptom Survey Score-25.9 ± 20.0-2.0 ± 17.9
Statistical analysis
  • MGX and Intense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL) vs Meibomian Gland Expression (MGX) · Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney) · p = 0.0312
SecondaryChange in Meibomian Glands Open - Right Lower Lid

The count of manual expression of the meibomian glands. A thumb is placed against the lid margin and press firmly against the eyeball to determine the percentage of meibomian pores that are blocked. This assessment is performed on both the upper and lower lid of each eye.

Time frame:
baseline, 3 months
Reported as:
Mean · percentage of blocked meibomian pores
Change in Meibomian Glands Open - Right Lower Lid
percentage of blocked meibomian poresMGX and Intense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL)Meibomian Gland Expression (MGX)
Change in Meibomian Glands Open - Right Lower Lid6.9 ± 11.05.0 ± 11.0
Statistical analysis
  • MGX and Intense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL) vs Meibomian Gland Expression (MGX) · Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney) · p = 0.79
SecondaryChange in Meibomian Glands Open - Left Lower Lid

The count of manual expression of the meibomian glands. A thumb is placed against the lid margin and press firmly against the eyeball to determine the percentage of meibomian pores that are blocked. This assessment is performed on both the upper and lower lid of each eye.

Time frame:
3 months
Reported as:
Mean · percentage of blocked meibomian
Change in Meibomian Glands Open - Left Lower Lid
percentage of blocked meibomianMGX and Intense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL)Meibomian Gland Expression (MGX)
Change in Meibomian Glands Open - Left Lower Lid14.4 ± 16.110.0 ± 14.1
Statistical analysis
  • MGX and Intense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL) vs Meibomian Gland Expression (MGX) · Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney) · p = 0.74

Adverse events

Collected over Adverse Events were collected over a period of 3 months. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
MGX and Intense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL)0/10 (0%)0/10 (0%)0/10 (0%)
Meibomian Gland Expression (MGX)0/10 (0%)0/10 (0%)0/10 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)MGX and Intense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL)Meibomian Gland Expression (MGX)Total
Mean59.3 ± 11.760.5 ± 12.159.9 ± 11.6
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)MGX and Intense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL)Meibomian Gland Expression (MGX)Total
Female71017
Male303
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Race/Ethnicity, Customized(Participants)MGX and Intense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL)Meibomian Gland Expression (MGX)Total
Hispanic/Latino011
Not Disclosed101
White9918
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(participants)MGX and Intense Pulsed Light Treatment (IPL)Meibomian Gland Expression (MGX)Total
United States101020
08

Study locations

1 site
  • Mayo Clinic in Arizona
    Scottsdale, Arizona 85259, United States
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Sagaser S, Butterfield R, Kosiorek H, Kusne Y, Maldonado J, Fautsch MP, Patel D, Shen JF. Effects of Intense Pulsed Light on Tear Film TGF-beta and Microbiome in Ocular Rosacea with Dry Eye. Clin Ophthalmol. 2021 Jan 27;15:323-330. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S280707. eCollection 2021. PubMed 33536740 ↗

Study documents

  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · Apr 28, 2017

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jan 3, 2020, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03194698
Lead sponsor
Mayo Clinic
Responsible party
Joanne F. Shen, M.D. (Chair, Department of Ophthalmology - Arizona, Mayo Clinic) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jun 21, 2017
Start date
Aug 17, 2017
Primary completion
Dec 6, 2018
Completion
Dec 6, 2018
Results posted
Jan 3, 2020
Last update
Jan 3, 2020

Study contacts

Joanne F Shen
principal investigator · Mayo Clinic

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Dec 2019. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion