Abstract
To compare two types of lipid expression procedures to treat dry eye disease. Standardized treatment and evaluation methods were used in patients treated with either manual thermoelectric lipid expression (MiBoFlo) or automated lipid expression (Lipiflow) of the Meibomian glands. This was a contemporaneous, non-randomized study of both treatment methods. Treatment was per the manufacturers' recommendation. The primary outcome included two types of dry eye questionnaires as well as objective analysis of ocular surface including tear break up time, Schirmer testing, Osmolarity, and fluorescein staining. Baseline characteristics analyzed included floppy lid, conjunctivochalasis and lagophthalmos. Statistical analysis was performed correcting for baseline factors such as age and co existing pathology using multivariable analysis. Both treatments improved the results of the OSDI and SPEED dry eye questionnaire results. Both treatments resulted in improvement of many objective findings including SPK, lissamine green staining and tear break up time with the MiBoFlo showing more improvement than Lipiflow. OSDI was more sensitive to improvement of symptoms than the SPEED questionnaire. Manual expression with MiBoFlo device resulted in statistically more improvement in questionnaire scores than did automated expression with Lipiflow. Negative prognostic factors for symptomatic improvement included blepharitis, autoimmune disease and ocular allergies. Thermal lid therapy along with mechanical expression of lipids from the meibomian glands successfully treats dry eye symptoms and signs. Manual therapy with MiBoFlo resulted in more subjective and objective improvement scores than automated therapy with the Lipiflow device.