Next Article in Journal
Why and How Does Empowering Leadership Promote Proactive Work Behavior? An Examination with a Serial Mediation Model among Hotel Employees
Previous Article in Journal
Analysis on Effectiveness of Impact Based Heatwave Warning Considering Severity and Likelihood of Health Impacts in Seoul, Korea
Previous Article in Special Issue
Health Investment Management and Healthcare Quality in the Public System: A Gender Perspective
Open AccessReview

A Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Hyaluronic Acid Eye Drops for the Treatment of Dry Eye Syndrome

1
Institute of Biomedical Science, Catholic Kwandong University International St. Mary’s Hospital, Incheon 22711, Korea
2
Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, Chung-Ang University, Seoul 06974, Korea
3
Executive Director of the Korean Contact Lens Study Society, Seoul 07345, Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editors: José Siles Gonzalez, Carmen Solano Ruiz, Paulo Joaquim Pina Queirós and Benito Yañez-Araque
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(5), 2383; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052383
Received: 4 January 2021 / Revised: 23 February 2021 / Accepted: 25 February 2021 / Published: 1 March 2021
Hyaluronic acid (HA) is commonly used for treating dry eye syndrome (DES). This meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacies of HA- and non-HA-based eye drops, including saline and conventional artificial tears (ATs), for the treatment of dry eye disease. Eight databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, DBpia, KoreaMed, KMBASE, RISS, KISS) were searched for studies comparing the efficacies of HA- and non-HA-based ATs in patients with DES published up to September 2020. Two independent reviewers assessed the quality and extracted the relevant data. The mean differences of Schirmer’s (SH) test scores, tear breakup times (TBUT), corneal fluorescein staining scores (Oxford scale, 0–4), and ocular surface disease indexes were calculated. The standard mean difference and 95% confidence interval were calculated using a random effect model. Nineteen studies, including 2078 cases, were included. HA eye drops significantly improved tear production compared with non-HA-based eye drops (standard mean difference (SMD) 0.18; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03, 0.33). In a subgroup analysis, the SH test scores and TBUT values after using HA significantly increased compared to those measured after using saline (SMD 0.27; 95% CI 0.05, 0.49 and SMD 0.28; 95% CI 0.03, 0.52, respectively). Based on these results, HA eye drops may be superior to non-HA eye drops including normal saline and ATs. Further research is needed to assess the efficacies stratified by age, treatment duration, the severity of dry eye, and optimal dosages. View Full-Text
Keywords: dry eye; hyaluronic acid; meta-analysis dry eye; hyaluronic acid; meta-analysis
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Yang, Y.-J.; Lee, W.-Y.; Kim, Y.-j.; Hong, Y.-p. A Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Hyaluronic Acid Eye Drops for the Treatment of Dry Eye Syndrome. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 2383. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052383

AMA Style

Yang Y-J, Lee W-Y, Kim Y-j, Hong Y-p. A Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Hyaluronic Acid Eye Drops for the Treatment of Dry Eye Syndrome. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(5):2383. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052383

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yang, Yun-Jung; Lee, Won-Young; Kim, Young-jin; Hong, Yeon-pyo. 2021. "A Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Hyaluronic Acid Eye Drops for the Treatment of Dry Eye Syndrome" Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18, no. 5: 2383. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052383

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop