Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparison of Corneal Epithelial Thickness Profiles Between Aqueous-Deficient and Evaporative Dry Eye Disease
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparison of Corneal Epithelial Thickness Profiles Between Aqueous-Deficient and Evaporative Dry Eye Disease
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparison of Corneal Epithelial Thickness Profiles Between Aqueous-Deficient and Evaporative Dry Eye Disease
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Comparison of Corneal Epithelial Thickness Profiles Between Aqueous-Deficient and Evaporative Dry Eye Disease
2026
Overview
Background/Objectives: Corneal epithelial thickness (CET) alterations reflect distinct mechanisms in aqueous-deficient and evaporative dry eye disease (DED) subtypes. In this study, we compare the CET profiles between patients with Sjögren’s syndrome (SS) and those with meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) to elucidate the underlying mechanisms. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 30 patients with SS and 30 age- and sex-matched with MGD. Assessments included corneal staining, Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), tear meniscus height (TMH), non-invasive breakup time, lipid layer thickness (LLT), and anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) CET mapping. Regional CET and superior–inferior asymmetry were compared. Results: The SS group exhibited higher corneal staining scores (2.18 ± 1.23 vs. 1.03 ± 1.18, p = 0.001) and lower TMHs (0.14 ± 0.06 vs. 0.18 ± 0.07 mm, p = 0.013), while the MGD group reported greater OSDI scores (40.39 ± 22.49 vs. 31.25 ± 22.81, p = 0.029). A significantly thinner central epithelium (p = 0.043) and localized inferior paracentral thinning (2–5 mm zone, p = 0.008) were noted in SS. Corneal staining was identified as the primary independent predictor of central and inferior CET reduction in both groups. In the MGD group, LLT was associated with the preserved inferior CET (p = 0.045) and superior–inferior thickness difference (p = 0.015). Conclusions: Distinct structural signatures are observed between DED subtypes. SS features central/inferior thinning from aqueous deficiency-mediated friction, whereas MGD shows a relatively preserved epithelial thickness influenced by LLT. Regional CET analysis may provide mechanistic insights into DED subtyping.
