{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.06548757170172084, 'fraction_numerical': 0.036806883365200764, 'mean_word_length': 5.210682492581602, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Eyelid hygiene in preparing dry eye patients for cataract surgical treatment].

PURPOSE
To evaluate the effectiveness of complex treatment, including eyelid hygiene, on the condition of ocular surface in dry eye patients before cataract surgery.


MATERIAL AND METHODS
The study included 56 female age-related cataract patients (64±4.3 years old) with dry eye caused by Meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD). The main group patients (n=28) underwent eyelid hygiene therapy (2 times a day, 1 month) that involved Blefarogel cleansing, Blefarolotion, Blefarogel-1. The main and control (n=28) group patients performed (during the month): «fat-water» type nanoemulsion instillation (3 times a day); preservative free vitamin-A application (at night). Methods included dry eye symptoms assessment (OSDI scale); TBUT; Shirmer-1 test; lissamine green vital staining with xerosis indicator calculation (van Bijsterveld scale); "lid wipers" symptom evaluation; Norn compression test. Statistical evaluation included: mean and standard deviation calculation (M±s); significance of differences assessment (Mann-Whitney U-test; Wilcoxon's T-test).


RESULTS
The main group patients (artificial tear, keratoprotection, eyelid hygiene) showed a statistically significant more pronounced decrease in OSDI (from 33.2±3.1 points to 15.2±1.8 points) and a significantly more pronounced increase in TBUT (from 4.8±0.5 s to 6.9±0.4 s) than in control group patients (artificial tear, keratoprotection; respectively, from 32.7±3.2 to 20.8±3.1 points and from 4.85±0.5 to 5.8±0.4 s; p<0.05). Apparently, this was associated with a significantly more pronounced relief of the MGD signs in main group patients (from 2.1±0.1 to 1.1±0.2 points; p<0.05) as a result of eyelid hygiene. In the control group, the dynamics of MGD severity (from 2.08±0.3 to 2.11±0.5 points) was statistically insignificant.


CONCLUSION
Eyelid hygiene (based on Blefarogel cleansing, Blefarolotion, Blefarogel-1) increases the effectiveness of dry eye treatment in MGD patients, compared with isolated tear substitution and keratoprotection.