Gelişmiş Arama

Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorKemeriz, Funda
dc.contributor.authorCalikoglu, Emel
dc.contributor.authorYasar, Erdogan
dc.contributor.authorGurlevik, Ugur
dc.contributor.authorSarac, Gulhan Aksoy
dc.date.accessioned2023-11-16T18:30:15Z
dc.date.available2023-11-16T18:30:15Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.issn2149-2247
dc.identifier.issn2149-2549
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.14744/etd.2021.62343
dc.identifier.urihttps://search.trdizin.gov.tr/yayin/detay/535979
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14065/5616
dc.description.abstractObjective: Acne rosacea (AR) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease that can cause serious ocular complications. This study was designed to evaluate dry eye disease (DED) and meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) in AR patients and to investigate the relationship between the cutaneous subtype of AR and ocular involvement. Materials and Methods: This study included 67 participants with AR and 50 healthy individuals. Patients diagnosed with 3 cutaneous subtypes were examined: erythematotelangiectatic rosacea (ETR), papulopustular rosacea (PPR), and phymatous rosacea (PR). An ophthalmatological examination was performed that included an evaluation of lid margin alterations due to meibomian gland (MG) obstruction, Ocular Surface Disease Index assessment, tear film break-up time testing, Schirmer testing, and a corneal conjunctival fluorescein staining assessment. Meibography was used to evaluate the upper and lower lids for MG loss. Results: Findings in the AR group revealed MGD in 45.5% and DED in 28.1%. The meibomian gland loss rate (MGLR) was 38.7 +/- 16.9% and the meibomian gland loss grade (MGLG) was 1.57 +/- 0.82%. The rate of MGLR and MGLG was significantly greater in the AR group than in the control group (p<0.001). PPR was seen in 59.7% of the 67 patients, ETR in 29.9%, and PR in 13.4%. A comparison of the MGD, MGLR, MGLG, and presence of DED in the 3 cutaneous subtype groups yielded statistically insignificant results. Conclusion: AR can affect MG morphology, which may result in MGD or DED. Though we did not find a significant difference in the ocular findings by subgroup, ocular involvement is a recognized risk in AR. Ophthalmologists and dermatologists should cooperate in the evaluation of AR patients. Additional studies to further examine the effects in subtype groups are recommended.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherErciyes Univ Sch Medicineen_US
dc.relation.ispartofErciyes Medical Journalen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectDry Eye Diseaseen_US
dc.subjectMeibographyen_US
dc.subjectMeibomian Gland Dysfunctionen_US
dc.subjectOcular Surface Diseasesen_US
dc.subjectRosaceaen_US
dc.subjectMeibomian Gland Dysfunctionen_US
dc.subjectStandard Classificationen_US
dc.subjectInternational Workshopen_US
dc.subjectOcular Rosaceaen_US
dc.subjectPrevalenceen_US
dc.titleEvaluation of the Relationship Between Rosacea Cutaneous Subtype and Meibography Findingsen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.departmentUfuk Üniversitesien_US
dc.identifier.doi10.14744/etd.2021.62343
dc.identifier.volume44en_US
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.startpage382en_US
dc.identifier.endpage386en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000859782600005en_US
dc.identifier.trdizinid535979en_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

DosyalarBoyutBiçimGöster

Bu öğe ile ilişkili dosya yok.

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster