ARVO

ARVO

Source:

Andrews JD, et al. Evaluation of meibography images should consider regional assessment to meibomian gland structural characteristics as well as global grading scales. Presented at: Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology meeting; May 6, 2020 (virtual meeting).

Disclosures: Andrews reports no relevant financial disclosures.
July 07, 2020
1 min read
Save

Meibomian gland imaging differs in global vs regional assessment

Source:

Andrews JD, et al. Evaluation of meibography images should consider regional assessment to meibomian gland structural characteristics as well as global grading scales. Presented at: Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology meeting; May 6, 2020 (virtual meeting).

Disclosures: Andrews reports no relevant financial disclosures.
You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

Researchers found significant differences in meibography image assessment between global grades and regional zones in patients with meibomian gland disease.

“Meibomian gland imaging is becoming an increasingly integral part of dry eye diagnosis and management in clinical practice,” Jonathan D. Andrews, OD, from the Andrews Eye Corporation/Optometric Associates in Lancaster, Pa., said during his ARVO presentation. “The purpose of this study was to assess how regional grades might differ from global grades when quantifying the severity of abnormal meibomian gland morphology.”

During the study, three masked observers reviewed 10 images of upper lids and 10 images of lower lids with varying morphology. The observers graded the images for atrophy, tortuosity and segmentation, referencing ordinal whole integer panels for the entire eyelid along with three regional zones: nasally, centrally and temporally.

The global grade was different compared with regional assessment of the nasal (P = .005) and central zones (P = .005) for atrophy; the nasal (P = .004), central (P = .042) and temporal zones (P = .005) for tortuosity; and the nasal (P = .028), central (P = .03) and temporal zones (P = .008) for segmentation.

Jonathan D. Andrews, OD
Jonathan D. Andrews

“There are significant differences in regional vs. global meibomian gland assessment,” Andrews said. “Regional differences in meibomian gland morphology compared to global grading necessitates further understanding of the pathophysiology of meibomian gland disease. Further grading scale definitions could prove to be helpful in understanding meibomian gland disease.”