Comparing meibomian gland visibility on optical coherence tomography and Keratograph 5M images using objective and subjective grading methods

0Citations
Citations of this article
1Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate if there is a visible difference in meibomian gland (MG) length between images captured with the Visante optical coherence tomography (OCT; wavelength = 1,310 nm) and the OCULUS Keratograph 5M (K5M; wavelength = 880 nm). Methods: Adults between 18 and 40 years were recruited. Baseline dry eye disease was evaluated with the Standard Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness (SPEED) and tear meniscus height and tear breakup time with the K5M. Right upper and lower eyelid MGs were imaged with the K5M and Visante OCT. Each image was graded with the 0 to 3 meiboscore scale. The central 5 MGs were evaluated with ImageJ for percent gland length visibility. Results: Thirty participants were analyzed with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 23.0 (5.0) years (53.3 % female). Overall, participants were asymptomatic and had normal tear films. Meiboscores based on K5M and Visante OCT was significantly different for the lower eyelid (0[1] vs 1[2]; p = 0.007) but not the upper eyelid (0[1] vs 0[1]; p = 1.00). The mean percent gland visibility of the upper eyelid (82.7[9.6] vs 75.2[13.5]; p < 0.001) and the lower eyelid (81.2[12.7] vs 64.1[17.6]; p < 0.001) were significantly greater on the Visante OCT than the K5M images, respectively. Conclusion: OCT images had significantly greater percent visible MG lengths than the K5M images. This suggests viable segments of the MGs may be missed with typical imaging, which may explain how it is possible that studies have found less post-treatment MG atrophy.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ravichandran, S., & Pucker, A. D. (2024). Comparing meibomian gland visibility on optical coherence tomography and Keratograph 5M images using objective and subjective grading methods. Contact Lens and Anterior Eye. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2024.102162

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free