Dry anophthalmic socket syndrome - morphological alterations in meibomian glands.
Journal
Eye (London, England)
ISSN: 1476-5454
Titre abrégé: Eye (Lond)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8703986
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2021
12 2021
Historique:
received:
26
07
2020
accepted:
20
01
2021
revised:
15
12
2020
pubmed:
11
2
2021
medline:
15
4
2022
entrez:
10
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To evaluate morphological alterations of meibomian glands (MGs) in the dry anophthalmic socket syndrome (DASS). Fifteen unilateral anophthalmic patients wearing cryolite glass prosthetic eyes were enrolled. All patients with clinical blepharitis or other significant eyelid abnormalities were excluded. In vivo laser scanning confocal microscopy (LSCM) of the MGs in the lower eyelids both on the anophthalmic side and the healthy fellow eye was performed to quantify acinar unit density, acinar unit diameter, acinar unit area, meibum secretion reflectivity, the inhomogeneous appearance of the glandular interstice, and inhomogeneous appearance of the acinar walls. The lower eyelids of the anophthalmic sockets revealed a significant reduction of the acinar unit density (p = 0.003) as well as a significantly more inhomogeneous appearance of the periglandular interstices (p = 0.018) and the acinar unit walls (p = 0.015) than the healthy fellow eyelid. However, there were no significant differences regarding the acinar unit diameter, acinar unit area, and meibum secretion reflectivity of the MGs on the anophthalmic side compared to the healthy fellow eyelid (p ≥ 0.05, respectively). The eyelids of anophthalmic sockets without clinical blepharitis demonstrate a reduced density of MG acinar units and a more inhomogeneous appearance of the periglandular interstices and the acinar unit walls. This can cause meibomian gland dysfunction contributing to DASS and suggests early treatment of these symptomatic patients, even in the clinical absence of any blepharitis signs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33564141
doi: 10.1038/s41433-021-01426-z
pii: 10.1038/s41433-021-01426-z
pmc: PMC8602645
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3358-3366Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Pine K, Sloan B, Stewart J, Jacobs RJ. A survey of prosthetic eye wearers to investigate mucoid discharge. Clin Ophthalmol. 2012;6:707–13.
pubmed: 22654496
pmcid: 3363311
Pine KR, Sloan B, Jacobs RJ. Deposit buildup on prosthetic eyes and implications for conjunctival inflammation and mucoid discharge. Clin Ophthalmol. 2012;6:1755–62.
pubmed: 23152653
pmcid: 3497451
doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S37250
Pine KR, Sloan B, Jacobs RJ. Biosocial profile of New Zealand prosthetic eye wearers. N. Z Med J. 2012;125:29–38.
pubmed: 23159899
Pine KR, Sloan B, Jacobs RJ. The development of measurement tools for prosthetic eye research. Clin Exp Optom. 2013;96:32–8.
pubmed: 22672062
doi: 10.1111/j.1444-0938.2012.00754.x
Pine KR, Sloan B, Stewart J, Jacobs RJ. The response of the anophthalmic socket to prosthetic eye wear. Clin Exp Optom. 2013;96:388–93.
pubmed: 23336714
doi: 10.1111/cxo.12004
Pine KR, Sloan BH, Jacobs RJ. A proposed model of the response of the anophthalmic socket to prosthetic eye wear and its application to the management of mucoid discharge. Med Hypotheses. 2013;81:300–5.
pubmed: 23660132
doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2013.04.024
Pine NS, de Terte I, Pine KR. An investigation into discharge, visual perception, and appearance concerns of prosthetic eye wearers. Orbit. 2017;36:401–6.
pubmed: 28812412
doi: 10.1080/01676830.2017.1337201
Pine NS, De Terte I, Pine KR. The impact of eye loss and prosthetic eye wear on recreational, occupational and social areas of functioning. J Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2017;2:1016.
Pine NS, De Terte I, Pine KR. Time heals: an investigation into how anophthalmic patients feel about eye loss and wearing a prosthetic eye. J Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2017;2:1018.
Rokohl AC, Adler W, Koch KR, Mor JM, Jia R, Trester M, et al. Cryolite glass prosthetic eyes-the response of the anophthalmic socket. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019;257:2015–23.
pubmed: 31203520
doi: 10.1007/s00417-019-04395-y
Rokohl AC, Koch KR, Adler W, Trester M, Trester W, Pine NS, et al. Concerns of anophthalmic patients-a comparison between cryolite glass and polymethyl methacrylate prosthetic eye wearers. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2018;256:1203–8.
pubmed: 29502234
doi: 10.1007/s00417-018-3942-8
Rokohl AC, Koch KR, Trester M, Heindl LM. Cryolite glass ocular prostheses and coralline hydroxyapatite implants for eye replacement following enucleation. Ophthalmologe. 2018;115:793–4.
pubmed: 29737403
doi: 10.1007/s00347-018-0726-9
Rokohl AC, Koch KR, Trester M, Trester W, Pine KR, Heindl LM. Concerns of anophthalmic patients wearing cryolite glass prosthetic eyes. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;34:369–74.
pubmed: 29194103
doi: 10.1097/IOP.0000000000001021
Rokohl AC, Mor JM, Trester M, Koch KR, Heindl LM. Rehabilitation of Anophthalmic patients with prosthetic eyes in germany today - supply possibilities, daily use, complications and psychological aspects. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2019;236:54–62.
pubmed: 30567009
Rokohl AC, Trester M, Pine KR, Heindl LM. Risk of breakage of cryolite glass prosthetic eyes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019;257:437–8.
pubmed: 30269198
doi: 10.1007/s00417-018-4155-x
Litwin AS, Worrell E, Roos JC, Edwards B, Malhotra R. Can we improve the tolerance of an ocular prosthesis by enhancing its surface finish? Ophthalmic Plast Reconstruct Surg. 2018;34:130–5.
doi: 10.1097/IOP.0000000000000891
Bohman E, Roed Rassmusen ML, Kopp ED. Pain and discomfort in the anophthalmic socket. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2014;25:455–60.
pubmed: 24878963
doi: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000069
Allen L, Kolder HE, Bulgarelli EM, Bulgarelli DM. Artificial eyes and tear measurements. Ophthalmology. 1980;87:155–7.
pubmed: 7383544
doi: 10.1016/S0161-6420(80)35266-4
Fett DR, Scott R, Putterman AM. Evaluation of lubricants for the prosthetic eye wearer. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 1986;2:29–31.
pubmed: 3154535
doi: 10.1097/00002341-198601040-00006
Franca IS, Medrado J, Franca VP, Soares EJ. Treatment of dry anophthalmic cavities with labial salivary glands transplantation. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2011;74:425–9.
pubmed: 22331116
Han JW, Yoon JS, Jang SY. Short-term effects of topical cyclosporine A 0.05% (Restasis) in long-standing prosthetic eye wearers: a pilot study. Eye (Lond). 2014;28:1212–7.
doi: 10.1038/eye.2014.174
Jang SY, Lee SY, Yoon JS. Meibomian gland dysfunction in longstanding prosthetic eye wearers. Br J Ophthalmol. 2013;97:398–402.
pubmed: 23322882
doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2012-302404
Jones CA, Collin JR. A classification and review the causes of discharging sockets. Trans Ophthalmol Soc UK. 1983;103:351–3.
pubmed: 6585078
Kim SE, Yoon JS, Lee SY. Tear measurement in prosthetic eye users with fourier-domain optical coherence tomography. Am J Ophthalmol. 2010;149:602–7 e601.
pubmed: 20138606
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2009.10.023
Ko JS, Seo Y, Chae MK, Jang SY, Yoon JS. Effect of topical loteprednol etabonate with lid hygiene on tear cytokines and meibomian gland dysfunction in prosthetic eye wearers. Eye. 2018;32:439–45.
pubmed: 29052604
doi: 10.1038/eye.2017.213
Adrian T, Lubis RR, Zubaidah TSH. Association between frequency of prosthesis cleaning and the discharge characteristics and the tear film in subjects with anophthalmic socket after eviceration with dermis fat graft. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2018;6:2012–6.
pubmed: 30559852
pmcid: 6290452
doi: 10.3889/oamjms.2018.468
Vardizer Y, Lang Y, Mourits MP, Briscoe MD. Favorable effects of lacrimal plugs in patients with an anophthalmic socket. Orbit. 2007;26:263–6.
pubmed: 18097964
doi: 10.1080/01676830600987557
Schittkowski MP, Guthoff RF. Results of lacrimal assessment in patients with congenital clinical anophthalmos or blind microphthalmos. Br J Ophthalmol. 2007;91:1624–6.
pubmed: 17567663
pmcid: 2095504
doi: 10.1136/bjo.2007.120121
Kashkouli MB, Zolfaghari R, Es’haghi A, Amirsardari A, Abtahi MB, Karimi N, et al. Tear film, lacrimal drainage system, and eyelid findings in subjects with anophthalmic socket discharge. Am J Ophthalmol. 2016;165:33–8.
pubmed: 26930225
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2016.02.016
Gupta R. OSC19: Customized liquid ocular prosthesis for anophthalmic patients suffering from dry eye: a clinical study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2018;18:S15.
pubmed: 30532412
pmcid: 6238519
Rasmussen ML. Complications from eye prosthesis. Ugeskr Laege. 2008;170:2456–8.
Koch KR, Trester W, Muller-Uri N, Trester M, Cursiefen C, Heindl LM. Ocular prosthetics. Fitting, daily use and complications. Ophthalmologe. 2016;113:133–42.
pubmed: 26160105
doi: 10.1007/s00347-015-0091-x
Marcelo MTC, Ranche JM, Pe-Yan MR, Tuaño PMC, Trio-Ranche FK. Tear and ocular surface profile in adult anopthalmic sockets. Philipp J Ophthalmol. 2012;37:104–10.
Rokohl AC, Trester M, Mor JM, Loreck N, Koch KR, Heindl LM. Customizing a Cryolite Glass Prosthetic Eye. J Vis Exp. 2019;18:453–9.
Rokohl AC, Trester M, Guo Y, Adler W, Jaeger VK, Loreck N et al. Dry anophthalmic socket syndrome – standardized clinical evaluation of symptoms and signs. The Ocular Surf. 2020;18:453–9.
Jacobi C, Bellios N, Jacobi A, Kruse F, Cursiefen C. Screening questionnaire for documentation of medical history and diagnostic findings in dry eye disease. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2011;228:226–33.
pubmed: 20393892
doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1245272
Chalmers RL, Begley CG, Caffery B. Validation of the 5-Item Dry Eye Questionnaire (DEQ-5): discrimination across self-assessed severity and aqueous tear deficient dry eye diagnoses. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2010;33:55–60.
pubmed: 20093066
doi: 10.1016/j.clae.2009.12.010
Simpson TL, Situ P, Jones LW, Fonn D. Dry eye symptoms assessed by four questionnaires. Optom Vis Sci. 2008;85:692–9.
pubmed: 18677225
doi: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e318181ae36
Schiffman RM, Christianson MD, Jacobsen G, Hirsch JD, Reis BL. Reliability and validity of the Ocular Surface Disease Index. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118:615–21.
pubmed: 10815152
doi: 10.1001/archopht.118.5.615
Amparo F, Schaumberg DA, Dana R. Comparison of two questionnaires for dry eye symptom assessment: the Ocular Surface Disease Index and the symptom assessment in dry eye. Ophthalmology. 2015;122:1498–503.
pubmed: 25863420
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.02.037
Villani E, Beretta S, De Capitani M, Galimberti D, Viola F, Ratiglia R. In vivo confocal microscopy of meibomian glands in Sjogren’s syndrome. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:933–9.
pubmed: 21169534
doi: 10.1167/iovs.10-5995
Villani E, Baudouin C, Efron N, Hamrah P, Kojima T, Patel SV, et al. In vivo confocal microscopy of the ocular surface: from bench to bedside. Curr Eye Res. 2014;39:213–31.
pubmed: 24215436
doi: 10.3109/02713683.2013.842592
Wang J, Palakuru JR, Aquavella JV. Correlations among upper and lower tear menisci, noninvasive tear break-up time, and the Schirmer test. Am J Ophthalmol. 2008;145:795–800.
pubmed: 18328997
pmcid: 2398653
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2007.12.035