Advertisement

Rheumatology International

, Volume 33, Issue 10, pp 2543–2548 | Cite as

Punctal plugs versus artificial tears for treating primary Sjögren’s syndrome with keratoconjunctivitis SICCA: a comparative observation of their effects on visual function

  • Weiqiang Qiu
  • Ziyuan Liu
  • Mingxin Ao
  • Xuemin LiEmail author
  • Wei Wang
Original Article

Abstract

To compare the effects of treatment with punctal plugs versus artificial tears on visual function for primary Sjögren’s syndrome with dry eye. Forty-two eyes of 42 patients with primary Sjögren’s syndrome were enrolled and were allocated randomly into artificial tears (AT) group and punctal plugs (PP) group. Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) was used, and fluorescent staining for tear film break-up time (BUT), the Schirmer test I (STI) and contrast sensitivity was performed before treatment and was repeated 3 months after treatment. A follow-up of 3 months was achieved in 40 eyes of 40 patients, including 19 eyes in artificial tears group and 21 eyes in punctal plugs group. Statistically significant improvements were observed in the OSDI scores (AT: 52.6 ± 5.7, 15.9 ± 4.2; PP: 55.8 ± 4.9, 15.1 ± 4.2), corneal fluorescein staining scores (AT: 2.60 ± 1.76, 0.30 ± 0.57; PP: 1.91 ± 1.60, 0.09 ± 0.29), STI (AT: 3.85 ± 2.03, 8.95 ± 2.72; PP: 3.36 ± 1.62, 11.41 ± 2.65), and BUT (AT: 2.60 ± 1.39, 6.00 ± 1.81; PP: 2.27 ± 1.12, 7.82 ± 1.84) after treatment compared to those of pre-treatment. The values of STI (AT: 5.10 ± 1.80; PP: 8.05 ± 1.53) and BUT (AT: 3.40 ± 1.31; PP: 5.68 ± 1.13) in punctal plugs group were significantly more improved than those in the artificial tears group. The medium- and high-level frequencies contrast sensitivities were greatly improved in simulated daylight, night, and glare disability conditions after treatment with artificial tears and punctal plugs. However, the changes in contrast sensitivity did not significantly differ between groups. Both artificial tears and punctal plugs relieved dry eye symptoms, repaired corneal lesions, enhanced tear film stability, and improved contrast sensitivity. Punctal plugs could improve tear film stability and elongate the BUT better than artificial tears.

Keywords

Sjögren’s syndrome Dry eye Punctal plugs Artificial tears Contrast sensitivity 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Supported in seed fund (No. 79495-01) and Linhu fund (No. 79495-02) of Peking University Third Hospital.

Conflict of interest

There is no financial conflict of the authors in this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Gayton JL (2009) Etiology, prevalence, and treatment of dry eye disease. Clin Ophthalmol 3:405–412PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Huang FC, Tseng SH, Shih MH, Chen FK (2002) Effects of artificial tears on corneal surface regularity contrast sensitivity and glare disability. Ophthalmology 109:1934–1940PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Liu Z, Pflugfelder SC (1999) Corneal surface regularity and the effect of artificial tears in aqueous tear deficiency. Ophthalmology 106:939–943PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Torkildsen G (2009) The effects of lubricant eye drops on visual function as measured by the Inter-blink interval visual acuity decay test. Clin Ophthalmol 3:501–506PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goto E, Yagi Y, Kaido M, Matsumoto Y, Konomi K et al (2003) Improved functional visual acuity after punctal occlusion in dry eye patients. Am J Ophthalmol 135:704–705PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vitali C, Bombardieri S, Jonsson R, Moutsopoulos HM, Alexan-der EL, Carsons SE et al (2002) Classification criteria for Sjögren’s syndrome: a revised version of the European criteria proposed by the American-European Consensus Group. Ann Rheum Dis 61(6):554–558PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Walt J (2004) Ocular surface disease index (OSDI) administration and scoring manual. Allergan, Inc., IrvineGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schiffman RM, Christianson MD, Jacobsen G et al (2000) Reliability and validity of the ocular surface disease index. Arch Ophthalmol 118:615–621PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Prabhasawat P, Tseng SCG (1998) Frequent association of delayed tear clearance in ocular irritation. Br J Ophthalmol 82:666–675PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pflugfelder SC, Tseng SCG, Sanabria O et al (1998) Evaluation of subjective assessments and objective diagnostic tests for diagnosing tear-film disorders known to cause ocular irritation. Cornea 17:38–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Toda I, Asano-Kato N, Komai-Hori Y, Tsubota K (2001) Dry eye after laser in situ keratomileusis. Am J Ophthalmol 132:l–l7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dursun D, Monroy D, Knighton R, Tervo T, Vesaluoma M, Carraway K et al (2000) The effects of experimental tear film removal on corneal surface regularity and barrier function. Ophthalmology 107:1754–1760PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Egrilmez Sait, Aslan Fatih, Karabulut Gonca, Kabasakal Yasemin, Yagci Ayse (2011) Clinical efficacy of the smartplug™ in the treatment of primary Sjögren’s syndrome with keratoconjunctivitis SICCA: one-year follow-up study. Rheumatol Int 31:1567–1570PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rieger G (1992) The importance of the precorneal tear film for the quality of optical imaging. Br J Ophthalmol 76:157–158PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rieger G (1993) Contrast sensitivity in patients with keratoconjunctivitis sicca before and after artificial tear application. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 231:577–579PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rolando M, Iester M, Macri A, Calabria G (1998) Low spatial-contrast sensitivity in dry eyes. Cornea 17:376–379PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Paulsson LE, Sjöstrand J (1980) Contrast sensitivity in the presence of a glare light. Theoretical concepts and preliminary clinical studies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 19:401–406PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gilbard JP, Rossi SR, Azar DT, Heyda KG (1989) Effect of punctal occlusion by Freeman silicone plug insertion on tear osmolarity in dry eye disorders. CLAO J 15(3):216–218PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Weiqiang Qiu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ziyuan Liu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Mingxin Ao
    • 1
    • 2
  • Xuemin Li
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Wei Wang
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of OphthalmologyPeking University Third HospitalHaidian District, BeijingChina
  2. 2.Key Laboratory of Vision Loss and Restoration, Ministry of EducationBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations