Different Approach to Manage Demodex Blepharitis - Initial and Maintenance Treatment.

PURPOSE/AIM OF THE STUDY: To evaluate the improvement of ocular signs and symptoms in patients suffering from Demodex blepharitis using a combined treatment approach: use of eyelid wipes impregnated with 2.5% terpinen-4-ol (T4O) and 0.2% hyaluronic acid (HA) in the initial treatment period and investigation of maintenance of the treatment effect with the use of eyelid cleansing wipes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty patients with Demodex blepharitis were treated in the initial treatment period with sterile eyelid T4O impregnated wipes for 28 days. In the following four-week maintenance period, 82% patients received sterile eyelid maintenance wipes, while 16% continued treatment with T4O impregnated wipes. Global ocular discomfort, adapted TOSS, SANDE score, and individual blepharitis symptoms were assessed by patients at day 28 and day 56. Ocular signs were evaluated by the investigator at the study visits. Investigator's assessment of the overall treatment performance, patient's assessment of treatment satisfaction, and tolerability were evaluated with questionnaires. RESULTS: All global ocular discomfort symptoms and disease specific symptoms assessed by patients as well as all parameters evaluated by the investigators significantly improved in the initial treatment period with the application of eyelid wipes impregnated with 2.5% terpinen-4-ol until day 28. The therapeutic effect was maintained or even improved during the maintenance period under administration of mainly eyelid maintenance wipes until day 56. Both products were well tolerated. No adverse events and no clinically relevant changes in visual acuity were observed during both periods. CONCLUSIONS: Once daily treatment with T4O impregnated eyelid wipes in the initial treatment period significantly improved the ocular symptoms and signs and reduced the mite count in patients with Demodex blepharitis within four-weeks administration. Subsequent maintenance treatment with maintenance wipes for another 4 weeks preserved or further intensified the treatment success. The products were well tolerated and were convenient to use.

Efficacy of treatments for Demodex blepharitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of different treatment for Demodex blepharitis. Parameters studied were mites count, improvement of symptoms and mites' eradication, stratified on type of treatments and mode of delivery of treatments (local or systemic). METHOD: The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, Google scholar and Science Direct databases were searched for studies reporting an efficacy of treatments for Demodex blepharitis. RESULTS: We included 19 studies (14 observational and 5 randomized clinical trials), for a total of 934 patients, 1741 eyes, and 13 different treatments. For mites count, eradication rate, and symptoms improvement, meta-analysis included fifteen, fourteen and thirteen studies, respectively. The overall effect sizes for efficiency of all treatments, globally, were 1.68 (95CI 1.25 to 2.12), 0.45 (0.26-0.64), and 0.76 (0.59-0.90), respectively. Except usual lid hygiene for mites count, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario ointment (CHEO) for both eradication rate and symptoms, and CHEO, 2% metronidazole ointment, and systemic metronidazole for eradication rate, all treatments were efficient. Stratified meta-analysis did not show significant differences between local and systemic treatments (1.22, 0.83 to 1.60 vs 2.24, 1.30 to 3.18 for mites count; 0.37, 0.21 to 0.54 vs 0.56, 0.06 to 0.99 for eradication rate; and 0.77, 0.58 to 0.92 vs 0.67, 0.25 to 0.98 for symptoms improvement). CONCLUSION: We reported the efficiency of the different treatments of Demodex blepharitis. Because of less systemic side effects, local treatments seem promising molecules in the treatment of Demodex blepharitis.

Contribution of diagnostic tests for the etiological assessment of uveitis, data from the ULISSE study (Uveitis: Clinical and medicoeconomic evaluation of a standardized strategy of the etiological diagnosis).

PURPOSE: ULISSE is the only study that prospectively assessed the efficiency of a standardized strategy, compared to an open strategy for the etiologic diagnosis of uveitis. Our aim was to evaluate the diagnostic yield of the tests prescribed in the ULISSE study to clarify their relevance. METHODS: ULISSE is a non-inferiority, prospective, multicenter and cluster randomized study. The standardized strategy is a two-steps strategy: in the first step, common standard tests were performed, and in the second step, tests were guided by the clinical and anatomic type of uveitis. We reported the relevance of the diagnostic tests used in the standardized strategy, as well as the profitability of the tests that were prescribed to more than twenty patients in each group. Based on diagnostic criteria, either an ophthalmologist, or an internist, established the profitability of a test by considering whether the test lead to a diagnosis or not. RESULTS: Among the 676 patients included (standardized 303; open 373), a diagnosis was made for 152 (50.4%) in the standardized group and 203 (54.4%) in the open group. The most common entities were HLA-B27 associated uveitis (22%), spondyloarthritis (11%), sarcoidosis (18%), tuberculosis (10.7%) and herpes virus infections (8.5%). Among the first step's systematic tests, tuberculin skin test was the most contributive investigation (17.1%), followed by chest X-ray (8.4%), C reactive protein and ESR (6.6% and 5.1%), complete blood count (2.2%) and VDRL (2.0%). The second step's most often contributive tests were: HLA B27 (56.3%), chest-CT (30.3%) and angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) (16.5%). HLA B27 and ACE were significantly more contributive in the standardized group than in the open group. Immunological tests were never contributive. Among the free investigations, or among the investigations guided by clinical or paraclinical findings, the most often contributive tests were: Quantiferon® (24%), electrophoresis of serum protein (7.8%) and sacroiliac imagery (46.4%). Intracellular serologies (1.7%), serum calcium (2.1%) and hepatic tests (3.3%) were exceptionally contributive. Among the third intention tests, labial salivary gland biopsies were contributive in 17.9% of cases, but the profitability of other invasive investigations (anterior chamber tap, vitrectomy, bronchoscopy and lumbar puncture) or specialized imagery (18F-FDG PET, Brain MRI) could not be determined since these test were rarely performed. CONCLUSION: Only a few diagnostic tests are useful for the etiological assessment of uveitis. They are often cheap, simple, more often guided by the clinical findings, and lead to an etiological diagnosis in most patients. On the other hand, some tests are never or exceptionally contributive, such as immunological tests or intracellular serologies. Further studies are required to evaluate the profitability of third intention imagery and invasive investigations.

Antioxidants intake and dry eye syndrome: a crossover, placebo-controlled, randomized trial.

PURPOSE: To assess whether an orally administered antioxidant dietary supplement could improve the objective clinical signs and alleviate the subjective symptoms of dry eye syndrome. METHODS: Twenty-four subjects diagnosed with dry eye syndrome were randomized in a crossover, double-blind, controlled, randomized study to receive a placebo or an antioxidants combination (Oxybiane) for 12 weeks. In all subjects, break-up time (BUT) test, Schirmer test, ocular symptoms (sore eyes, burning, itching, sensation of foreign object in the eye, photophobia, sticky eyes, and redness), visual comfort, and general well-being were evaluated weekly. RESULTS: After 12 weeks of supplementation with Oxybiane, both the BUT scores (27.3%+/-8.4% with Oxybiane versus 3.61%+/-4.3% with the placebo, p=0.017) and the Schirmer scores (26.9%+/-14.2% with Oxybiane versus -4.7%+/-3.4% with the placebo, p=0.037) were significantly increased. A significantly improvement was also observed considering subjective clinical symptoms such as burning (p=0.031), itching (p=0.027), sensation of foreign body in eye (p=0.030), and redness (p=0.043). CONCLUSIONS. Supplementation with oral antioxidants can improve both tear stability and quantity but also subjective clinical signs.