Published in Ocular Surface

The Ultimate Guide to Demodex Blepharitis

This is editorially independent content
47 min read

By properly identifying and diagnosing Demodex blepharitis, you will be able to treat the underlying cause of several ocular surface disorders triggered by mite infestation. Learn everything you need to know about this complex condition.

The Ultimate Guide to Demodex Blepharitis
Blepharitis is a common condition encountered by eyecare providers, with over 2 million cases reported annually in the US.1-4 Typically, the condition is caused by bacterial overgrowth or allergies and responds well to routinely used treatments, such as antibiotics. However, in some cases, patients do not respond to standard treatments leading to persistent irritation and ocular symptoms.
In such cases, other potential causes should be explored, and one of the top suspects should be the parasitic mite—Demodex. Demodex are ectoparasitic mites that live on human skin and are found in hair follicles and sebaceous glands as part of the skin’s natural microflora.5,6 However, when the mites overpopulate, their presence can lead to Demodex blepharitis (DB) as well as several other ocular maladies including meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD), conjunctivitis, keratitis, and eyelash disruptions.5,7-13

This makes properly identifying an overgrowth of Demodex and appropriately treating the condition vital to successfully managing stubborn cases of ocular surface disease.

Though blepharitis is common, Demodex as a causative organism is often overlooked. While traditionally about half of cases of blepharitis (equaling nearly 9 million) have been recognized as DB1-4, this may be a gross underestimate as recent studies have found that about 58% of all patients presenting to eye clinics for any reason show signs of DB, which pushes the number of estimated cases in the US to roughly 25 million.14-16
When the total patient population displaying signs of DB was broken down into specific groups, it was found that 1.2 million were dry eye patients currently using a prescription medication to treat their condition, 2.3 million were contact lens intolerant patients, and 2.2 million patients had cataracts.14-16 These numbers are particularly important considering these are groups where ocular surface health is crucial, whether they are suffering from chronic ocular surface irritation, desiring but unable to wear contact lenses, or about to undergo cataract surgery and a healthy ocular surface is critical to obtaining reliable preoperative measurements to ensure the best post-operative refractive outcome.
Additionally, DB can have a significant effect on quality of life with nearly 80% of DB patients reporting negative consequences of the condition.17 The majority of patients suffering from DB reported ocular irritation for over 4 years.18 In addition to discomfort, patients reported cosmetic concerns, such as redness and challenges wearing makeup, and functional issues, like difficulty with nighttime driving.17
Despite all the negative effects of Demodex infestation on ocular surface health and function, DB still remains underdiagnosed as a recent study showed that 58% of patients presenting with signs and symptoms of Demodex never received a diagnosis of DB.18 This underscores the need for all eyecare providers (ECPs) to carefully look for this condition in our patients to prevent cases of DB from going unresolved.

Who is at risk for Demodex blepharitis?

Demodex are a normal part of our skin’s microflora so everyone, at some point in their lives, will exhibit Demodex.5,6,19 There are conflicting data regarding whether Demodex are more common in males or females with differing studies finding the mite to be more prevalent in females,20-22 more prevalent in males,23-25 or finding no difference between sexes.26,27 Demodex are observed in all races.26
However, the density of Demodex is highly correlated to age, as Demodex are present in 84% of the population by age 60 and 100% of the population at 70 and older.19 As Demodex increase with age, they are less common in the pediatric population with most pediatric cases involving immunocompromised individuals, although, rarely, Demodex can occur in healthy pediatric patients as well.28
Similarly, Demodex tend to be found in immunocompromised individuals in general including those with condition such as cancer or HIV or individuals undergoing immunosuppressive therapy.7,29 Other factors that increase risk for Demodex infestation include rosacea, fair skin complexion, diet (consumption of spicy foods, alcohol, and hot beverages), emotional state (stress), environmental conditions (sunlight exposure, sudden temperature changes), and smoking.5,30,31
Interestingly, many of these risk factors are also triggers for rosacea, which has a high correlation with Demodex infestation, with Demodex overpopulation even being proposed as the underlying etiology of rosacea.9,32-36
It is important to note, however, that the presence of Demodex does not necessarily mean an individual will experience any ocular symptoms. In fact, many individuals displaying signs of Demodex are asymptomatic.37,38
Additionally, it has been debated whether the presence of Demodex is beneficial or detrimental.8 It has been proposed that Demodex may be helpful by blocking overgrowth of other more harmful microbes such as certain bacteria and other mites.11 However, it is thought that when the density of Demodex becomes too great, this overpopulation upsets the natural homeostatic balance of the environment of the lids and lashes leading to an infestation of Demodex referred to as demodicosis.5,7-13
Once demodicosis has occurred, patients are at risk for negative ocular manifestations such as DB, MGD, conjunctivitis, keratitis, and eyelash disruptions. The exact tipping point between normal Demodex presence and overpopulation is not known, so standard criteria for what constitutes demodicosis has not been explicitly established.7,8 However, it has been shown that 100% of patients displaying cylindrical dandruff or collarettes at the base of the eyelashes have DB, to the extent that lash collarettes are considered pathognomonic for the condition.11,16,39
While this finding does not determine the exact extent of Demodex infestation or if a patient is symptomatic, it can be a useful sign for identifying a patient at risk of having or developing symptomatic DB.
As seen in Figure 1, Demodex blepharitis is caused by an overpopulation of Demodex mites resulting in a disruption of the lids, lashes, and ocular surface.
Figure 1: Photo by author

What are Demodex?

Demodex are ectoparasitic mites that live on human skin and are part of our natural microflora.5,6 They are arthropods with three body segments and have a cigar-like shape with four pairs of legs with clawed ends and pincer-like mouth pieces40,41 that make the mites adept at gripping cylindrical structures, such as eye lashes, and burrowing into glands and follicles.10,11

Humans are host to two species of Demodex: Demodex folliculorum and Demodex brevis.

While there are many species of Demodex found across mammals, these are the only two found in humans and are the only ones that affect the eye.7 The two mites also occupy separate niches, with D. folliculorum (the larger species at 0.3-0.4 mm in length) found on the lashes and lash follicles, and D. brevis (the smaller species at 0.2-0.3 mm in length) inhabiting sebaceous glands.5,13,42-45
Although they occupy different areas, D. folliculorum and D. brevis are often found together.23,24,46 The mites can also be found on the skin of the cheeks, nose, forehead, and in the eyebrows as well.5,19,47,48 The mites feed on epithelial cells and sebum found where they reside,5,10,11,40 however they lack a fully formed digestive system so they must regurgitate all undigested material with this physiology leading to a relatively short life span.40,49
Demodex mate in the openings of hair follicles and lay their eggs in either hair follicles or sebaceous glands, where it takes about 2 weeks for the eggs to develop into a larval stage.5,40,45 The adult mites then live an additional week giving Demodex a typical lifespan of about 3 weeks.5,45
Figure 2 illustrates Demodex folliculorum (0.3-0.4 mm in length).104
Figure 2: Photo credit-K.V. Santosh
Figure 3 illustrates Demodex brevis (0.2-0.3 mm in length).105
Figure 3: Photo credit-Austin Whittal

How do Demodex cause Demodex blepharitis?

The ocular manifestations of Demodex are a result of the mites’ physiology and ecological niches which contribute to mechanical damage, inflammation, and chronic hypersensitivity.8 D. folliculorum feeds upon the epithelial cells of hair and lash follicles, with the mite physically biting the cells resulting in microabrasions. Over time this microtrauma results in hyperplasia and hyperkeratinization which can cause lid margin thickening and disruption of the lashes including lash loss and misdirection.5,13,16,50
D. brevis burrow into the meibomian glands, which are modified sebaceous glands, where the feed upon meibum.5,10,11,42,40 This burrowing physically obstructs the gland orifices leading to meibomian gland hyperplasia and dysfunction, with blockage further exacerbated by the accumulation of the mites’ waste.8,10,13 D. folliculorum and brevis lay their eggs in lash follicles and meibomian glands, respectively, which also leads to obstruction of both structures.39,40 In addition to the mechanical damage caused by physical biting and obstruction, the mites also elicit an inflammatory response.
Because Demodex lack a fully developed excretory system, they must regurgitate all undigested material.49 This excreta contains proinflammatory digestive enzymes that can cause irritation to the lid margin and disrupt the tear film and ocular surface.11,39
Furthermore, when this waste mixes with other debris and Demodex eggs, it forms a waxy, cylindrical coating that wraps around the base of the lashes which is referred to as cylindrical dandruff or lash collarettes.7,11,12,39,50 These collarettes, which are the hallmark sign of DB, act as a significant source of inflammation and can disrupt both the lashes and lid margin.
Additionally, the exoskeleton of Demodex is made of chitin, which is thought to elicit a foreign body response which stimulates the formation of a granuloma around the mite. This granulomatous response can lead to chalazion development, especially in cases of D. brevis as they are found inside the meibomian glands.5,7,39,51
In Figure 4, Demodex folliculorum inhabit lash follicles and produce waste and eggs that mix to produce a buildup of waxy debris, known as cylindrical dandruff or collarettes, which forms at the base of the lashes. In the above image a heavy accumulation of collarettes can be observed.
Figure 4: Photo by author
Demodex may also indirectly provoke an inflammatory response by acting as a vector for bacteria. Streptococcal and Staphylococcal species have been shown to live on the surface of Demodex mites, while Bacillus oleronius resides inside their abdomen.52-54 Each of these bacterial species can cause inflammation that results in blepharitis, so Demodex may be acting as a bacterial reservoir in addition to the direct damage they inflict.
Finally, it has been proposed that Demodex promote a Type IV hypersensitivity reaction. It is thought proteins contained inside the mites and their waste stimulate a delayed, cell-mediated response that can lead to chronic inflammation.53,55
It has also been noted that Demodex can still cause disruption even after their demise, as proinflammatory proteins and bacteria are released from their bodies upon death.5,8 Each of these mechanisms ultimately elicits an inflammatory response resulting in blepharitis, MGD, and eyelash disruption that can further develop into conjunctivitis and keratitis if this inflammation spills over to the conjunctiva and cornea.
Figure 5 demonstrates Demodex brevis being found in sebaceous glands including the meibomian glands, which are modified sebaceous glands. This leads to a physical obstruction of the gland orifices which can cause MGD as is displayed by the blocked and inspissated meibomian glands pictured above.
Figure 5: Photo by author

What are the signs and symptoms of Demodex blepharitis?

The signs and symptoms of DB are a direct result of the mechanical and inflammatory damage they inflict upon the lid margin and lashes. Physical biting, use of digestive enzymes, obstruction of follicular and meibomian glands, and the presence of proinflammatory collarettes all result in ocular surface irritation and dysfunction, with the most common symptoms of DB presenting as foreign body sensation, burning, stinging, epiphora, transiently blurred vision, and general irritation.7,50
The signs of DB are easily recognizable in the form of characteristic waxy, cylindrical collarettes wrapping around the bases of the lashes signifying the presence of D. folliculorum,7,50 in addition to meibomian gland hyperplasia and obstruction, indicating D. brevis infestation.8,13 Obstruction and inflammation of the glands may also lead to recurrent hordeola and chalazia.39,51
Other signs include lid margin erythema and telangiectasia (which is also indicative of ocular rosacea which is commonly associated with demodicosis)32,56 as well as lid notching or scalloping due to chronic inflammation, especially if the condition is left untreated.8 D. folliculorum will often cause disruption to the eyelashes themselves in the form of madarosis, trichiasis, and distichiasis.5,7,50
While many of the signs and symptoms of Demodex blepharitis are nonspecific, the presence of sleeve-like collarettes around the lash base, as seen in Figure 6, are pathognomonic for Demodex blepharitis.
Figure 6: Photo by author
Demodex blepharoconjunctivitis and blepharokeratitis occur when inflammation from DB is so great it spills over onto the conjunctiva and cornea. D. brevis are more likely to cause blepharoconjunctivitis and blepharokeratitis due to their closer proximity to the conjunctiva and cornea.5,9,12 Demodex blepharoconjunctivitis presents with all the signs and symptoms of DB in addition to conjunctival injection and possible chemosis.
Demodex blepharokeratitis is notable for the fact that the degree of inflammation present is often significant, to the point where it is commonly misidentified as herpetic keratitis.7-9 Demodex blepharokeratitis typically occurs bilaterally and can display superficial punctate keratitis (SPK), peripheral neovascularization, marginal corneal infiltrates, central stromal infiltrates, corneal scars or opacities, nodules or phlyctenular lesions, limbitis, and rarely perforation.7-9 Though rare, other important noted associations for demodicosis are basal and sebaceous gland carcinomas.5,57-59
As seen in Figure 7, mites found inside the meibomian glands and hair follicles can elicit a granulomatous response that results in hordeolum or chalazion development.
Figure 7: Photo by author

What conditions are associated with Demodex blepharitis?

There are several common comorbidities and conditions related to demodicosis and DB. These include other ocular surface conditions such as dry eye and ocular rosacea. As previously noted, demodicosis can cause MGD and chalazion or hordeolum development in addition to blepharitis, so these conditions are not always separate entities.
This may also be the case for dry eye and ocular rosacea as well. MGD is involved in about 80% of cases of dry eye60, so MGD secondary to demodicosis can ultimately result in dry eye.39 Additionally, demodicosis as an underlying cause of ocular rosacea is widely supported.9,32-36 So, even these ostensibly independent comorbid conditions may be caused by an underlying mite infestation as well.
Regardless of the ultimate origin of these related disorders, they should be included on the list of differential diagnoses for DB and treated accordingly if found to coexist alongside DB.

Demodex and keratitis

Keratitis, specifically herpetic keratitis, warrants a special mention in terms of differential diagnosis as the literature notes that Demodex blepharokeratitis can closely mimic herpes keratitis and is a common misdiagnosis.7,8 For this reason, it is recommended that Demodex be included as a potential diagnosis in cases of keratitis, especially if they are nonresponsive to antiviral therapy.5,7,8 This same philosophy has been suggested to be extended to all forms of ocular surface disease (blepharitis, MGD, dry eye, conjunctivitis, etc.) that do not improve with standard therapy.
In such cases, the recalcitrant nature of these usually readily treated conditions is often due to demodicosis acting as the root cause, and until the mites are addressed the condition will not resolve.7,8
Ocular rosacea, which is characterized by marked lid and ocular surface telangiectasia, like that illustrated in Figure 8, is commonly associated with Demodex blepharitis. In fact, it is even thought that Demodex may be the underlying cause of the condition.
Figure 8: Photo by author

How is Demodex blepharitis diagnosed?

Demodicosis and DB are typically diagnosed clinically based on signs and symptoms, with the diagnosis confirmed by microscopic analysis of lash sampling.7,8 However, as previously discussed DB presents with several nonspecific signs and symptoms such as ocular irritation, redness, and tearing that can also be attributed to other ocular surface conditions, like dry eye and ocular rosacea which are also common comorbidities of DB.
So, from a symptomatic standpoint it can be very easy to overlook DB or misattribute the patient’s condition to one of these other ocular surface diseases. This places greater emphasis on the unique signs of DB, which are fortunately easily identifiable. The presence of collarettes at the base of the lashes is pathognomonic for DB, with the literature reporting that 100% of patients displaying collarettes have DB.11,16,39
Although the presence of collarettes make the diagnosis of DB relatively straightforward, subtle collarettes can be easily missed when a patient is in primary gaze. For this reason, it is recommended that ECPs have patients look down during slit lamp examination to bring the base of the lashes and any collarettes into plain view, making evaluation of the lashes and lid margin quick and efficient. It is worth noting the presence of collarettes is technically only indicative of D. folliculorum, however patients will likely have D. brevis as well, especially if signs of MGD, such as gland hyperplasia or obstructed gland orifices, are also present.
Another major indicator that aids in the diagnosis of DB is ocular surface disease that is refractory to standard treatments.7,8 For instance, cases of blepharitis, conjunctivitis, or keratitis that do not respond to traditional antibiotic, antiviral, or steroidal therapies strongly suggests Demodex as the underlying cause as the mites are resistant to all these forms of treatment.7-9,47,61 So, cases of nonresponsive ocular surface disease can be indicative of demodicosis and are confirmed by the presence of lash collarettes.
While the diagnosis of Demodex blepharitis can be made clinically based upon the presence of lash collarettes, the diagnosis is confirmed by lash sampling, as seen in Figure 9. The process traditionally involves epilating several lashes from each lid and viewing the samples under a microscope to quantify the number of Demodex present.
Figure 9: Photo by author
While the presence of collarettes and meibomian gland dysfunction are sufficient for a clinical diagnosis of DB, the diagnosis is traditionally confirmed through lash sampling.7,8 The Coston Method of lash sampling involves epilation of four random, nonadjacent lashes per lid and then mounting them on a slide by applying a drop of oil and coverslip followed by viewing with a confocal microscope and a count of the mites being made.50,62
However, it is strongly recommended that lashes with collarettes be epilated rather than random lashes as sampling random lashes tends to underestimate the extent of the infestation.5,8,63
Alternative methods of assessing the density of Demodex involve using sodium fluorescein, peanut oil, or 75% alcohol to free embedded mites from debris when analyzing lash samples.8 A noninvasive method includes the Mastrota Twirling Technique, which involves using forceps to rotate the lash without epilation as this motion coaxes the mites out of lash follicles and allows for direct viewing behind a slit lamp.50
Another method makes use of in vivo confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) for noninvasive viewing of the mites which appear round or cone-like in appearance.12,64
One caveat to note when diagnosing demodicosis or DB, whether through clinical observation of collarettes, lash sampling, or viewing with a slit lamp or in vivo CLSM, is that there is no exact established mite count that constitutes an overpopulation that moves the presence of Demodex from a normal density to an infestation warranting a diagnosis of demodicosis.7,8 Therefore, there is still a degree of clinical judgment required when making the diagnosis, which usually comes down to a patient experiencing ocular symptoms in the presence of lash collarettes.

How is Demodex blepharitis treated?

Demodex are highly resistant to most forms of treatment. As they are parasitic arthropods, they will not respond to antibacterial, antiviral, or antifungal treatment, and they are surprisingly resistant to other broad antimicrobial agents such as 75% alcohol and 10% povidone-iodine.47

Xdemvy (lotilaner ophthalmic solution 0.25%)

Although anti-inflammatory agents may reduce the inflammation caused by Demodex, they do not address the root cause, which is the mites themselves. For this reason, treatment with antiparasitic agents with acaricidal properties is required. Traditionally, this involved using hygiene-based treatments such as tea tree oil (TTO). However, while these cleansers can be beneficial in managing DB, they are imperfect treatments. As will be discussed in more detail in the following section describing the use of TTO in DB, TTO is a relatively harsh compound and can cause ocular irritation. This is especially true of the higher concentrations that are often recommended for more effective mite eradication, which typically exceed the commonly used 2-5% formulations. Additionally, there is no established standard dosing when treating DB with TTO, and a systematic literature review of the use of TTO for short-term DB treatment could not definitively establish its efficacy for this purpose despite its widespread use.76 All these factors create a degree of clinical uncertainty that is less than desirable when attempting to treat DB.
However, the FDA-approval of Xdemvy (lotilaner ophthalmic solution 0.25%, Tarsus Pharmaceuticals) represents a shift in DB management and offers a new primary treatment for DB. Xdemvy is an antiparasitic agent that eradicates Demodex by inhibiting parasite-specific GABA-Cl channels, which causes paralysis of the mites, resulting in death.77,78,106 Xdemvy is also highly lipophilic, which allows it to be readily absorbed into the eyelash follicles and meibomian glands where the mites reside and can be directly targeted by the medication.107 In two Phase 3 studies, Xdemvy was shown to significantly improve DB through mite eradication (60% of patients achieved complete mite eradication defined as 0 mites per lash), collarette reduction (50% of patients achieved complete collarette cure defined as ≤2 collarettes on the upper lid, while clinically meaningful collarette cure defined as ≤10 collarettes was observed in 85% of patients), and improvement of eyelid erythema (25% of patients displayed erythema cure defined as grade 0 or no lid margin erythema on a 0-3 scale corresponding to no erythema, mild, moderate, and severe erythema, respectively) when dosed BID x 6 weeks, which corresponds to roughly two life cycles of the mites.108-110 However, benefits for some patients were shown as early as two weeks of use.108-111 Additionally, Xdemvy was well-tolerated, with 90% of patients reporting the drop to be neutral to very comfortable, with the most common side-effect being stinging and burning upon instillation in 10% of patients, which was typically mild and transient.108-110 Therefore, given its status as the first and only FDA-approved treatment specifically indicated for the management of DB, its high degree of clinical efficacy, and its safety and tolerability profile, Xdemvy represents a new, definitive first-line treatment for DB.112
However, this also signals a major shift in the DB treatment paradigm. While lid hygiene-based treatments used to be the primary therapies for DB, they will now likely take on a more fitting role as secondary, supportive therapies rather than first-line treatment. For instance, TTO or okra-based cleansers will likely now be used as routine maintenance treatments after and between courses of Xdemvy as an adjunct therapy while Xdemvy will function as the primary therapeutic agent. Additionally, Xdemvy may lessen the treatment burden on patients. Whereas the use of lid hygiene has no definitive dosing duration and is therefore sometimes used indefinitely, Xdemvy’s 6-week course provides a rather concrete endpoint for treatment. While we have yet to see how frequently patients may need to undergo a repeat course of Xdemvy, and although the use of lid hygiene treatments will likely still be beneficial, if a patient is able to discontinue the use of some of the other cleansers, even temporarily, this could provide a significant benefit. The reason for this is that the spectrum of ocular surface disease is often multifactorial, therefore the majority of patients will need to be on multiple, often long-term, treatments to address each contributing element. Therefore, reducing the number of required treatments, even by one, can improve a patient’s quality of life (QoL) by reducing their treatment burden.
Although Xdemvy fundamentally changes how DB has been traditionally managed, this will likely allow ECPs to possibly achieve enhanced treatment outcomes for DB than we have previously been able to obtain through lid hygiene alone.

Tea Tree Oil

Before the advent of Xdemvy, tea tree oil (TTO), which comes from the tea tree (Melaleuca alternifolia) for which it receives its name, was the most commonly used primary treatment for DB.65,66
The active ingredient in TTO is terpinen-4-ol (also referred to as 4-terpineol) which is broadly antimicrobial and antiseptic with antibacterial, antiviral, antifungal, anti-inflammatory, and most importantly, demodicidal properties.65-69 Terpinen-4-ol is an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor, which kills the mites, and the presence of TTO forces the mites to evacuate the follicles and sebaceous glands they inhabit.16,47,66 The mites are then left exposed on the surface of the skin and prevented from laying eggs in follicular and sebaceous glands, making them vulnerable to eradication.70
Additionally, TTO effectively removes collarettes and cleanses the lashes.47 TTO successfully can be used at varying concentrations, however it is worth noting the same properties that make TTO an effective antimicrobial agent also make it a relatively harsh treatment with side effects that can include ocular irritation, contact dermatitis, and an allergic response,71 with the risks of these side effects increasing with higher concentrations. These side effects help shape the most routinely utilized dosing regimens used in TTO therapy. Typically, the concentrations of TTO used range from 2-50%.8,47,66
The most widely used at-home treatments are 2% and 5% TTO dosed BID, with 50% treatments usually reserved for once weekly administration in-office due to a higher side effect profile.8,48,71TTO comes in numerous forms including foam cleansers, scrubs, and wipes, all of which can be effective, so the choice is primarily dependent on ECP and patient preference.
Some commonly used lower concentration at-home options:
For high concentration, in-office treatment Oust Demodex Swabstix (tea tree oil 50%, OCuSoft) can be used.
There is no established standard duration of treatment, as treatment can range from weeks to an indefinite period. However, it is recommended that treatment last a minimum of 6 weeks as this corresponds to two life cycles of the mites.12

As previously mentioned, a systematic literature review of short-term treatment of DB with TTO could not conclusively determine its efficacy.76 Additionally, it is crucial to mention that the goal of treatment with TTO is not complete eradication of the mites, as that goal is generally considered unobtainable with most traditional treatments but rather a reduction in mite density.8,18,65 This is also an appropriate clinical goal as Demodex are part of our normal microflora, so as long as their population is held to an appropriate level, patients should be asymptomatic.

However, to keep the Demodex population in check prophylactic treatment, usually at less frequent dosing, beyond the initial 6 weeks of treatment is often required. Application of the preferred form of treatment should involve thorough scrubbing of the lids and lashes, especially at the base of the lashes and the lid margin where the mites reside, to ensure the environment is rendered uninhabitable and the mites are eliminated.
Additionally, TTO should be applied to the eyebrows, cheeks, nose, and forehead as Demodex can also be found in these areas and act as a reservoir for ocular reinfestation if left untreated.47,48 It is important to stress to patients that the TTO treatment is meant for the lids and lashes and not the eyes themselves, as TTO can cause transient, but intense, irritation if it gets onto the surface of the eye proper.
A typical treatment regimen involves using 2-5% TTO BID for 6 weeks followed by QD or every other day use for prophylaxis. The duration of prophylactic treatment can vary from patient to patient as DB is a chronic condition, and in-turn requires chronic treatment. However, the dosing and treatment pattern used will largely depend on patient symptoms and side effect tolerability. If a patient is asymptomatic after completion of 6 weeks of treatment but tends to react poorly to TTO, then the patient can be treated on an as needed basis and resume TTO use if symptoms return.
Conversely, if a patient tolerates TTO well but symptoms quickly return upon discontinuation of therapy, they can be kept on treatment indefinitely. If in-office treatment with 50% TTO is performed, patients should receive one treatment weekly for 6 weeks with the patient also performing an at-home 2-5% TTO treatment QD-BID. The aim of this treatment regimen is to use the 50% concentration to force the mites out of the lash follicles and meibomian glands and on to the surface where they are exposed and vulnerable to eradication by lower strength 2-5% at-home TTO treatments.8,65,72
As a reminder, the use of 2-5% TTO QD-BID will now likely act as an adjunct maintenance therapy between courses of Xdemvy and, therefore, function in a supportive rather than primary role when managing DB.
Patients are also advised to discard any makeup used prior to treatment and to routinely launder their towels and bedding to prevent these items from serving as potential sources of reinoculation.8

Other treatments for DB

Other potential treatments for DB include hypochlorous acid, such as HyClear (hypochlorous acid 0.01%, Contamac), Avenova (hypochlorous acid 0.01%, NovaBay Pharmaceuticals), and Optase Protect (hypochlorous acid 0.015%, SCOPE). Hypochlorous acid (HOCl) is produced by leukocytes of the immune system as a natural antiseptic agent.73 However, while some studies have suggested that hypochlorous acid may reduce the number of Demodex present, whether the compound is truly demodicidal remains controversial.8,74
Even if hypochlorous acid is not demodicidal it may be helpful in the management of DB, as it has broad antiseptic activity that can reduce the number of Streptococcal and Staphylococcal bacteria present on the lids and lashes, as these bacteria are found on the surface of Demodex mites, and can themselves contribute to chronic bacterial conjunctivitis, which can be a related comorbidity to DB.52-54,73
For this reason, after the initial 6-week period of treatment with TTO, patients can use TTO and hypochlorous acid in tandem, with one used in the morning and the other before bed, to provide two separate mechanisms of lid hygiene that address both the Demodex and bacterial components of blepharitis.Additionally, hypochlorous acid can be a useful alternative in cases where patients are unable to use TTO due to an allergic reaction or intolerance, even if hypochlorous acid cannot reduce Demodex to the same extent as TTO.
Another potential alternative includes okra-based cleansers, such as ZocuFoam Eyelid Cleanser and Moisturizer and ZocuWipes (Zocular) which have also shown capability in eradicating Demodex.75 Though it has traditionally been used to treat blepharitis, the use of baby shampoo should be avoided as not only does it fail to eradicate Demodex, but it can have a detrimental effect on the tear film as well.8,65
As illustrated in Figure 10, it can be challenging to achieve the complete elimination of Demodex. The goal of treatment is to reduce the number of mites and proinflammatory collarettes to an asymptomatic level.
Figure 10: Photo by author

Alternative treatments for Demodex blepharitis

Aside from topical therapies, there are other treatments that can be helpful in managing DB.

In-office debridement

Debridement of the lid margin and lashes using microblepharoexfoliation can be an excellent adjunct treatment to TTO use.48 Demodicosis causes a buildup of debris on the lid margin and lashes due to an accumulation of waste, proteins, Demodex eggs, and collarettes.7,11,12,39,50 This can lead to thickening of the lid margin and physical obstruction of the lash follicles and meibomian glands resulting in MGD and chalazion and hordeolum development, as well as lid margin changes such as notching due to the inflammatory nature of this debris.5,7,8,10,13,39,51
Additionally, the Staphylococcal, Streptococcal, and Bacillus bacteria present on the surface and inside of the mites can add a bacterial component to DB which results in the development of proinflammatory biofilm on the lid margin as well.8,52-54 Microblepharoexfoliation performed in-office, with a device such as NuLids PRO (NuLids) or BlephEx (Blephex), or with an at-home device like NuLids (NuLids) can greatly improve DB by debriding the lids and lashes of inflammatory debris and collarettes, while also reducing the number of Demodex mites and bacteria present.48,79,80

Zocular Eyelid System Treatment

Another alternative exfoliative treatment for DB is ZEST (Zocular Eyelid System Treatment; ZocuKit, Zocular), which involves using an okra-based cleansing gel in conjunction with manual debridement of the lids and lashes.75

Thermal pulsation

Thermal pulsation treatments with in-office procedures like LipiFlow (Johnson & Johnson), iLux (Alcon), or TearCare (Sight Sciences) as well as at-home use of warm compresses can be helpful in managing the MGD observed in DB by melting any clogged meibum and then expressing the obstructed glands.81,82
However, these treatments alone will not address the root cause of the problem in cases of Demodex-associated MGD, as D. brevis are ultimately responsible for the obstruction of the meibomian glands. Therefore, it is necessary to address any demodicosis associated with MGD by using TTO treatment in conjunction with thermal pulsation therapies to achieve maximum benefit.

Tear film stabilizers and neurostimulatory agents

Again, although tear film instability caused by Demodex-induced MGD must ultimately be addressed by a treatment that targets the mites directly, other therapies that can help stabilize the tear film may be beneficial. Miebo (100% perfluorohexyloctane ophthalmic solution, Bausch + Lomb) can help stabilize the tear film by forming a protective monolayer over the surface of the tear film that mimics the function of the lipid layer and aids in preventing premature evaporation,113-115 whereas Tyrvaya (varenicline solution nasal spray 0.03mg, Viatris) increases natural tear production through neurostimulation of the parasympathetic pathway via the trigeminal nerve.116,117

Intense pulsed light therapy

In my professional opinion, another excellent treatment option in cases of DB is intense pulsed light (IPL) therapy. IPL functions through the delivery of high intensity polychromatic light (400-1200 nm) to the target tissue.83,84 IPL is an ideal treatment option for DB because it addresses several components of the condition in a single treatment modality. IPL has been shown to be demodicidal as the chitinous exoskeletons of Demodex contain chromophores that absorb the energy delivered by the pulsed light that leads to a rapid heating of the mite, resulting in death via coagulative necrosis.85,86
Additionally, IPL treatment decreases the number of bacteria present and decreases inflammation via photobiomodulation.86-88 The procedure also has been shown to improve the signs and symptoms of MGD86,89 and can lead to the regression of proinflammatory telangiectatic blood vessels associated with ocular rosacea.86,90 Again, this makes IPL an excellent treatment option for DB as both MGD and ocular rosacea are routinely observed alongside the condition.
The use of IPL for the treatment of MGD and dry is widely supported as the OptiLight IPL device is FDA-approved for these indications.91,92 A typical IPL treatment protocol for DB would be 4 total treatments spaced 3-4 weeks apart.93,94

Omega-3 supplements

Additional treatments to consider are adjunct therapies that address any concomitant ocular surface diseases such as dry eye. Omega-3 fatty acid supplementation is encouraged as it has been shown to improve the signs and symptoms of MGD as well as reduce inflammation.95-99 A high-quality re-esterified, triglyceride-based supplement containing a 3:1 EPA to DHA ratio and at least 2 grams of combined EPA and DHA, such as PRN De3 (PRN Physician Recommended Nutriceuticals), is highly recommended as this formulation has demonstrated efficacy in improving MGD.100


A patient displaying signs of ocular rosacea, such as pronounced lid margin telangiectasia, may need additional treatment like low-dose oral doxycycline.101,102 Cosmetic redness is another common concern for patients affected by DB. A vasoconstrictive agent such as Lumify (brimonidine tartrate 0.025% ophthalmic solution, Bausch + Lomb), is a treatment of choice as it provides redness reduction without inducing any rebound redness once its effects wear off.103
Again, it should be noted that these treatments should be used in conjunction with a demodicidal agent such as TTO in cases of DB, as the resolution of the condition will only occur if the underlying Demodex infestation is addressed.
Demodicosis can result in several different ocular disorders, including blepharitis, MGD, and chalazion development, all of which can be observed in Figure 11. However, unless the underlying Demodex infestation is treated, these conditions will often remain unresponsive to traditional therapies. Therefore, it is critical to address any mite overpopulation when managing ocular surface conditions in the presence of Demodex.
Figure 11: Photo by author

Educating patients about Demodex blepharitis

Like all ocular surface conditions, patient education is key. This is especially true for DB, as many patients may be unaware that their symptoms of itching, dryness, and redness are not due to allergies or traditional dry eye, but an overabundance of parasitic mites. Therefore, in addition to explaining the condition in a clear and understandable manner (example script for ECPs given below), photographs or the use of models can be powerful tools in helping the patient understand the condition.
When a patient hears that they have mites on their lids and then sees a picture of a mite and collarettes, either their own through slit lamp photography or through an example picture, patients tend to react quite strongly and often respond that they will do whatever they need to get rid of the Demodex. Additionally, it is important to explain that the goal of treatment does not have to be the complete elimination of the mites, as we normally have some level of Demodex on our skin. So, as long as we can keep the number of Demodex at a low enough level that they do not cause ocular symptoms, then they should not experience any issues.
This also sets expectations for treatment and creates an understanding that maintenance therapy in the form of routine lid hygiene with TTO or future retreatment with a prescription medication like Xdemvy may be needed if the Demodex population increases to a problematic level once again. This also helps patients understand exactly what is occurring in DB. This understanding often improves compliance with treatment and ultimately improves outcomes.

Example patient education script for Demodex blepharitis

“Demodex are small mites that live on our skin, specifically in our hair follicles and oil glands. It is completely normal for these mites to be there, as we will all have them at some point in our lives, and, normally, they do not cause any issues. However, in some cases, the number of mites present gets too high, which leads to a buildup of their waste on our eyelids and eyelashes causing irritation and redness. They can also clog up our oil glands which can cause chalazia to form.

Because these mites are not a bacterium or virus, they cannot be treated with antibiotic or antiviral medication. Subsequently, this makes them a little more difficult to get rid of.

Traditionally, we treated the mites with eyelid cleansers like tea tree oil, a compound derived from the tea tree plant which can be applied to the lids and lashes, especially near the lid margin because that is where the mites live. But, one potential issue with these TTO cleansers is the oil is very strong so it can be irritating to the eyes when you use it, especially if it gets in the eye itself because it will cause a stinging or burning sensation.

However, we also now have a prescription option for the treatment of Demodex blepharitis referred to as Xdemvy. The drop is FDA-approved and it is able to effectively reduce the number of mites, eyelash collarettes, and amount of eyelid redness present when used twice a day for 6 weeks. I typically like to start with this treatment and use a lid hygiene cleanser for maintenance afterwards, but if the mites return to infestation levels, we can do another course of Xdemvy.”

Models and photos of Demodex mites, as seen in Figure 12, can be an excellent way to educate patients and help them visually understand their condition. The use of these educational resources can improve compliance and result in better treatment outcomes.
Figure 12: Photo by author


Blepharitis is one of the most common conditions ECPs routinely encounter.

There can be several causes for the condition; however, one often overlooked cause is an overgrowth of Demodex mites. The two mites that affect the eye, D. folliculorum and brevis, reside in the lash follicles and meibomian glands, respectively, which can lead to blepharitis, MGD, lash disruption, conjunctivitis, and even keratitis. Therefore, if a patient develops blepharitis or one of these other ocular surface conditions and does not respond to normal treatments, such as antibiotics or antivirals, demodicosis should be suspected, and if collarettes are present at the base of the lashes, this is pathognomonic for Demodex blepharitis.
As ECPs, it is crucial to properly identify and diagnose Demodex blepharitis, especially now that there exists the first FDA-approved treatment in the form of Xdemvy in addition to traditional therapies such as TTO. By doing so, we can treat the underlying cause of several ocular surface disorders triggered by mite infestation and ultimately potentially improve patients’ ocular surface health and QoL.
  1. Paulsen AJ, Cruickshanks KJ, Fischer ME, et al. Dry eye in the beaver dam offspring study: prevalence, risk factors, and health-related quality of life. Am J Ophthalmol. 2014;157(4):799-806.
  2. Schaumberg DA, Nichols JJ, Papas EB, Tong L, Uchino M, Nichols KK. The international workshop on meibomian gland dysfunction: report of the subcommittee on the epidemiology of, and associated risk factors for, MGD. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52(4):1994-2005.
  3. Howden LM, Meyer JA. Age and Sex Composition: 2010. United States Census Bureau, Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration. 2011.
  4. Tarsus. Data on file. Tarsus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 2019.
  5. Liu J, Sheha H, Tseng SC. Pathogenic role of Demodex mites in blepharitis. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. 2010;10(5):505-510.
  6. Gutierrez Y. Diagnostic pathology of parasitic infections with clinical correlations, 2nd ed. New York. NY: Oxford University Press. 2000.
  7. Luo X, Li J, Chen C, Tseng S, Liang L. Ocular Demodicosis as a Potential Cause of Ocular Surface Inflammation. Cornea. 2017;36 Suppl 1:S9-S14
  8. Fromstein SR, Harthan JS, Patel J, Opitz DL. Demodex blepharitis: clinical perspectives. Clin Optom (Auckl). 2018;10:57-63.
  9. Kheirkhah A, Casas V, Li W, Raju VK, Tseng SC. Corneal manifestations of ocular demodex infestation. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007;143(5):743-749.
  10. Bhandari V, Reddy JK. Blepharitis: always remember demodex. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2014;21(4):317-320.
  11. Nicholls SG, Oakley CL, Tan A, Vote BJ. Demodex species in human ocular disease: new clinicopathological aspects. Int Ophthalmol. 2017;37(1):303-312.
  12. Cheng AM, Sheha H, Tseng SC. Recent advances on ocular Demodex infestation. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2015;26(4):295-300.
  13. English FP, Nutting WB. Demodicosis of ophthalmic concern. Am J Ophthalmol. 1981;91(3):362-372.
  14. Sadri E, Yeu E, Trattler W, Holdbrook M, Baba S. The prevalence of collarettes and Demodex blepharitis in ophthalmology and optometry practices. Presented at: ASCRS 2021. Abstract 75009.
  15. Wilson FA, Stimpson JP, Wang Y. Inconsistencies Exist in National Estimates of Eye Care Services Utilization in the United States. J Ophthalmol. 2015;2015:435606.
  16. Gao YY, Di Pascuale MA, Li W, et al. High prevalence of Demodex in eyelashes with cylindrical dandruff. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46(9):3089-3094.
  17. Yeu E, Holdbrook M, Baba S, Gomes PJ. Psychosocial impact of Demodex blepharitis. Presented at: ARVO 2021. Abstract 3544849.
  18. Schachter S, Yeu E, Holdbrook M, Baba S, Gomes PJ. Clinical manifestations of Demodex blepharitis. Presented at: ARVO 2021. Abstract 3546575.
  19. Post CF, Juhlin E. Demodex folliculorum and blepharitis. Arch Dermatol. 1963;88:298–302.
  20. Lazaridou E, Apalla Z, Sotiraki S, Ziakas NG, Fotiadou C, Ioannides D. Clinical and laboratory study of rosacea in northern Greece. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2010;24(4):410-414.
  21. Cui JH, Wang C. Facial Demodex infestation among urban and rural residents in Shangqiu City of Henan Province. Zhongguo Ji Sheng Chong Xue Yu Ji Sheng Chong Bing Za Zhi. 2012; 30(4):283-5.
  22. Zhong J, Tan Y, Li S, et al. The Prevalence of Demodex folliculorum and Demodex brevis in Cylindrical Dandruff Patients. J Ophthalmol. 2019;2019:8949683.
  23. Isa NH, Loong LW, Fang GH, et al. Demodicosis among university medical students in Malaysia and the effects of facial cleanser and moisturizer usage. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health. 2011;42(6):1375-1380.
  24. Hu Q, Wang Y. Investigation on the prevalence of human Demodex among 2,248 medical students in inner Mongolia. Zhongguo Ji Sheng Chong Xue Yu Ji Sheng Chong Bing Za Zhi. 2001; 19(4):239-40.
  25. Vargas-Arzola J, Reyes-Velasco L, Segura-Salvador A, Márquez-Navarro A, Díaz-Chiguer DL, Nogueda-Torres B. Prevalence of Demodex mites in eyelashes among people of Oaxaca, Mexico. Acta Microbiol Immunol Hung. 2012;59(2):257-262.
  26. Kuźna-Grygiel W, Kosik-Bogacka D, Czepita D, Sambor I. Objawowe i bezobjawowe inwazje Demodex spp. powiek u osób w różnych grupach wiekowych. Wiadomości Parazytologiczne. 2004; 50(1): S.55-61.
  27. Zhao YE, Guo N, Xun M, Xu JR, Wang M, Wang DL. Sociodemographic characteristics and risk factor analysis of Demodex infestation (Acari: Demodicidae). J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2011;12(12):998-1007.
  28. Liang L, Safran S, Gao Y, Sheha H, Raju VK, Tseng SC. Ocular demodicosis as a potential cause of pediatric blepharoconjunctivitis. Cornea. 2010 Dec;29(12):1386-91
  29. Kulac M, Ciftci IH, Karaca S, Cetinkaya Z. Clinical importance of Demodex folliculorum in patients receiving phototherapy. Int J Dermatol. 2008 Jan;47(1):72-7.
  30. Wilkin JK. Oral thermal-induced flushing in erythematotelangiectatic rosacea. J Invest Dermatol. 1981 Jan;76(1):15-8. doi: 10.1111/1523-1747.ep12524458. PMID: 6450809.
  31. Bernstein JE. Rosacea flushing. Int J Dermatol. 1982 Jan-Feb;21(1):24.
  32. Steinhoff M, Schauber J, Leyden JJ. New insights into rosacea pathophysiology: a review of recent findings. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013 Dec;69(6 Suppl 1):S15-26.
  33. Oge' LK, Muncie HL, Phillips-Savoy AR. Rosacea: Diagnosis and Treatment. Am Fam Physician. 2015 Aug 1;92(3):187-96.
  34. Wladis EJ, Adam AP. Treatment of ocular rosacea. Surv Ophthalmol. 2018 May-Jun;63(3):340-346.
  35. Oltz M, Check J. Rosacea and its ocular manifestations. Optometry. 2011 Feb;82(2):92-103.
  36. Levin J, Miller R. A Guide to the Ingredients and Potential Benefits of Over-the-Counter Cleansers and Moisturizers for Rosacea Patients. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2011 Aug;4(8):31-49.
  37. Norn MS. Incidence of Demodex folliculorum on skin of lids and nose. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh). 1982 Aug;60(4):575-83.
  38. Kemal M, Sümer Z, Toker MI, Erdoğan H, Topalkara A, Akbulut M. The Prevalence of Demodex folliculorum in blepharitis patients and the normal population. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2005 Aug;12(4):287-90.
  39. Liang L, Ding X, Tseng SC. High prevalence of demodex brevis infestation in chalazia. Am J Ophthalmol. 2014 Feb;157(2):342-348.e1.
  40. Litwin D, Chen W, Dzika E, Korycińska J. Human Permanent Ectoparasites; Recent Advances on Biology and Clinical Significance of Demodex Mites: Narrative Review Article. Iran J Parasitol. 2017;12(1):12-21.
  41. Jing X, Shuling G, Ying L. Environmental scanning electron microscopy observation of the ultrastructure of Demodex. Microsc Res Tech. 2005 Dec 1;68(5):284-9.
  42. Spickett SG. Studies on Demodex folliculorum Simon (1842). Parasitology. 1961; 51: 181-192.
  43. Rufli T, Mumcuoglu Y. The hair follicle mites Demodex folliculorum and Demodex brevis: biology and medical importance. A review. Dermatologica. 1981;162(1):1-11.
  44. Szkaradkiewicz A, Chudzicka-Strugała I, Karpiński TM, Goślińska-Pawłowska O, Tułecka T, Chudzicki W, Szkaradkiewicz AK, Zaba R. Bacillus oleronius and Demodex mite infestation in patients with chronic blepharitis. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012 Oct;18(10):1020-5.
  45. Lacey N, Kavanagh K, Tseng SC. Under the lash: Demodex mites in human diseases. Biochem (Lond). 2009 Aug 1;31(4):2-6.
  46. Madeira NG, Sogayar MI. The prevalence of Demodex folliculorum and Demodex brevis in a pop-ulation sample from Botucatu, São Paulo, Bra-zil. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop. 1993; 26(4):221-4.
  47. Gao YY, Di Pascuale MA, Elizondo A, Tseng SC. Clinical treatment of ocular demodecosis by lid scrub with tea tree oil. Cornea. 2007 Feb;26(2):136-43.
  48. Murphy O, O'Dwyer V, Lloyd-McKernan A. The efficacy of tea tree face wash, 1, 2-Octanediol and microblepharoexfoliation in treating Demodex folliculorum blepharitis. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2018 Feb;41(1):77-82.
  49. Desch CE. The digestive system of Demodex folliculorum (Acari: Demodicidae) of man: a light and electron microscope study. Progress in Acarology. Red. G. P. Channabasavanna, C. A. Viraktamath. 1989; 187-195.
  50. Hom MM, Mastrota KM, Schachter SE. Demodex. Optom Vis Sci. 2013 Jul;90(7):e198-205.
  51. Yam JC, Tang BS, Chan TM, Cheng AC. Ocular demodicidosis as a risk factor of adult recurrent chalazion. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2014 Mar-Apr;24(2):159-63.
  52. Li J, O'Reilly N, Sheha H, Katz R, Raju VK, Kavanagh K, Tseng SC. Correlation between ocular Demodex infestation and serum immunoreactivity to Bacillus proteins in patients with Facial rosacea. Ophthalmology. 2010 May;117(5):870-877.e1.
  53. Bevins CL, Liu FT. Rosacea: skin innate immunity gone awry? Nat Med. 2007 Aug;13(8):904-6.
  54. Lacey N, Delaney S, Kavanagh K, Powell FC. Mite-related bacterial antigens stimulate inflammatory cells in rosacea. Br J Dermatol. 2007 Sep;157(3):474-81.
  55. Georgala S, Katoulis AC, Kylafis GD, Koumantaki-Mathioudaki E, Georgala C, Aroni K. Increased density of Demodex folliculorum and evidence of delayed hypersensitivity reaction in subjects with papulopustular rosacea. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2001 Sep;15(5):441-4.
  56. Wilkin J, Dahl M, Detmar M, Drake L, Feinstein A, Odom R, Powell F. Standard classification of rosacea: Report of the National Rosacea Society Expert Committee on the Classification and Staging of Rosacea. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002 Apr;46(4):584-7.
  57. Erbagci Z, Erbagci I, Erkiliç S. High incidence of demodicidosis in eyelid basal cell carcinomas. Int J Dermatol. 2003 Jul;42(7):567-71.
  58. Galea M, Sharma R, Srinivasan S, Roberts F. Demodex blepharitis mimicking eyelid sebaceous gland carcinoma. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2014 Mar;42(2):208-10.
  59. Morrás PG, Santos SP, Imedio IL, Echeverría ML, Hermosa JM. Rosacea-like demodicidosis in an immunocompromised child. Pediatr Dermatol. 2003 Jan-Feb;20(1):28-30.
  60. Lemp MA, Crews LA, Bron AJ, Foulks GN, Sullivan BD. Distribution of aqueous-deficient and evaporative dry eye in a clinic-based patient cohort: a retrospective study. Cornea. 2012 May;31(5):472-8.
  61. Leibowitz HM, Capino D. Treatment of chronic blepharitis. Arch Ophthalmol. 1988 Jun;106(6):720.
  62. Coston TO. Demodex folliculorum blepharitis. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 1967;65:361-392.
  63. Kheirkhah A, Blanco G, Casas V, Tseng SC. Fluorescein dye improves microscopic evaluation and counting of demodex in blepharitis with cylindrical dandruff. Cornea. 2007 Jul;26(6):697-700.
  64. Randon M, Liang H, El Hamdaoui M, Tahiri R, Batellier L, Denoyer A, Labbé A, Baudouin C. In vivo confocal microscopy as a novel and reliable tool for the diagnosis of Demodex eyelid infestation. Br J Ophthalmol. 2015 Mar;99(3):336-41.
  65. Gao YY, Di Pascuale MA, Li W, Baradaran-Rafii A, Elizondo A, Kuo CL, Raju VK, Tseng SC. In vitro and in vivo killing of ocular Demodex by tea tree oil. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005 Nov;89(11):1468-73.
  66. Tighe S, Gao YY, Tseng SC. Terpinen-4-ol is the Most Active Ingredient of Tea Tree Oil to Kill Demodex Mites. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2013;2(7):2.
  67. Halcón L, Milkus K. Staphylococcus aureus and wounds: a review of tea tree oil as a promising antimicrobial. Am J Infect Control. 2004 Nov;32(7):402-8.
  68. Hammer KA, Carson CF, Riley TV. Antifungal effects of Melaleuca alternifolia (tea tree) oil and its components on Candida albicans, Candida glabrata and Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2004 Jun;53(6):1081-5.
  69. Caldefie-Chézet F, Guerry M, Chalchat JC, Fusillier C, Vasson MP, Guillot J. Anti-inflammatory effects of Melaleuca alternifolia essential oil on human polymorphonuclear neutrophils and monocytes. Free Radic Res. 2004 Aug;38(8):805-11.
  70. Ngo W, Jones L, Bitton E. Short-Term Comfort Responses Associated With the Use of Eyelid Cleansing Products to Manage Demodex folliculorum. Eye Contact Lens. 2018 Nov;44 Suppl 2:S87-S92.
  71. Koo H, Kim TH, Kim KW, Wee SW, Chun YS, Kim JC. Ocular surface discomfort and Demodex: effect of tea tree oil eyelid scrub in Demodex blepharitis. J Korean Med Sci. 2012;27(12):1574-1579. doi:10.3346/jkms.2012.27.12.1574.
  72. Gao YY, Xu DL, Huang lJ, Wang R, Tseng SC. Treatment of ocular itching associated with ocular demodicosis by 5% tea tree oil ointment. Cornea. 2012 Jan;31(1):14-7.
  73. Epitropoulos AT. Lid hygiene product helps reduce blepharitis, MGD symptoms. Ophthalmology Times. November 15, 2015. Accessed February 21, 2022.
  74. Kabat AG. Hypochlorous acid solution (Avenova®) is not demodicidal. Clin Optom (Auckl). 2018;10:115-117.
  75. Evaluation of the Efficacy of ZocuFoam Eyelid Cleanser & Moisturizer on the In Vitro Killing of Ocular Demodex. Zocular. Accessed February 21, 2022.
  76. Savla K, Le JT, Pucker AD. Tea tree oil for Demodex blepharitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;6(6):CD013333. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD013333.pub2
  77. Toutain CE, Seewald W, Jung M. The intravenous and oral pharmacokinetics of lotilaner in dogs. Parasit Vectors. 2017;10(1):522. doi:10.1186/s13071-017-2475-z
  78. Rufener L, Danelli V, Bertrand D, et al. The novel isoxazoline ectoparasiticide lotilaner (Credelio™): a non-competitive antagonist specific to invertebrates γ-aminobutyric acid-gated chloride channels (GABACls). Parasit Vectors. 2017;10(1):530. doi:10.1186/s13071-017-2470-4
  79. Connor CG, Narayanan S, Miller W. Reduction in inflammatory marker matrix metalloproteinase-9 following lid debridement with BlephEx. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2017;58(8):498-498.
  80. Mastrota KM. Demodex: Recognize it and Treat it. Optometry Times. Published October 11, 2021. Accessed February 21, 2022.
  81. Greiner JV. Long-term (12-month) improvement in meibomian gland function and reduced dry eye symptoms with a single thermal pulsation treatment. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2013 Aug;41(6):524-30.
  82. Blackie CA, Coleman CA, Holland EJ. The sustained effect (12 months) of a single-dose vectored thermal pulsation procedure for meibomian gland dysfunction and evaporative dry eye. Clin Ophthalmol. 2016 Jul 26;10:1385-96.
  83. Babilas P, Schreml S, Szeimies RM, Landthaler M. Intense pulsed light (IPL): a review. Lasers Surg Med. 2010 Feb;42(2):93-104.
  84. Schoenewolf NL, Barysch MJ, Dummer R. Intense pulsed light. Curr Probl Dermatol. 2011;42:166-172.
  85. Fishman HA, Periman LM, Shah AA. Real-Time Video Microscopy of In Vitro Demodex Death by Intense Pulsed Light. Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg. 2020 Aug;38(8):472-476.
  86. Dell SJ. Intense pulsed light for evaporative dry eye disease. Clin Ophthalmol. 2017 Jun 20;11:1167-1173.
  87. Young S, Bolton P, Dyson M, Harvey W, Diamantopoulos C. Macrophage responsiveness to light therapy. Lasers Surg Med. 1989;9(5):497-505.
  88. Smith K. The photobiological basis of low level laser radiation therapy. Laser Ther. 1991;3:19–24.
  89. Yin Y, Liu N, Gong L, Song N. Changes in the Meibomian Gland After Exposure to Intense Pulsed Light in Meibomian Gland Dysfunction (MGD) Patients. Curr Eye Res. 2018 Mar;43(3):308-313.
  90. Papageorgiou P, Clayton W, Norwood S, Chopra S, Rustin M. Treatment of rosacea with intense pulsed light: significant improvement and long-lasting results. Br J Dermatol. 2008 Sep;159(3):628-32.
  91. Hutton D. FDA approves IPL device to manage dry eye disease. Ophthalmology Times website. Published April 29, 2021. Accessed February 21, 2022.
  92. Lumenis Receives FDA Approval for Its IPL Device to Manage Dry Eye Disease and Launches OptiLight. Eyewire News website. Published April 29, 2021. Accessed February 21, 2022.
  93. Toyos R, McGill W, Briscoe D. Intense pulsed light treatment for dry eye disease due to meibomian gland dysfunction; a 3-year retrospective study. Photomed Laser Surg. 2015;33(1):41-46.
  94. Yuan M, Marmalidou A, Brissette A. Ocular Rosacea: Essentials for Providers. Surface Matters. MillennialEYE website. November, 2020. Accessed February 21, 2022.
  95. Sheppard JD Jr, Singh R, McClellan AJ, Weikert MP, Scoper SV, Joly TJ, Whitley WO, Kakkar E, Pflugfelder SC. Long-term Supplementation With n-6 and n-3 PUFAs Improves Moderate-to-Severe Keratoconjunctivitis Sicca: A Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial. Cornea. 2013 Oct;32(10):1297-304.
  96. Pinna A, Piccinini P, Carta F. Effect of oral linoleic and gamma-linolenic acid on meibomian gland dysfunction. Cornea. 2007 Apr;26(3):260-4.
  97. Gumus K, Cavanagh DH. The role of inflammation and antiinflammation therapies in keratoconjunctivitis sicca. Clin Ophthalmol. 2009;3:57-67.
  98. Macsai MS. The role of omega-3 dietary supplementation in blepharitis and meibomian gland dysfunction (an AOS thesis). Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2008;106:336-56.
  99. Oleñik A, Jiménez-Alfaro I, Alejandre-Alba N, Mahillo-Fernández I. A randomized, double-masked study to evaluate the effect of omega-3 fatty acids supplementation in meibomian gland dysfunction. Clin Interv Aging. 2013;8:1133-8.
  100. Epitropoulos AT, Donnenfeld ED, Shah ZA, Holland EJ, Gross M, Faulkner WJ, Matossian C, Lane SS, Toyos M, Bucci FA Jr, Perry HD. Effect of Oral Re-esterified Omega-3 Nutritional Supplementation on Dry Eyes. Cornea. 2016 Sep;35(9):1185-91.
  101. Vieira AC, Höfling-Lima AL, Mannis MJ. Ocular rosacea--a review. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2012 Oct;75(5):363-9.
  102. Sobrin L, Liu Z, Monroy DC, Solomon A, Selzer MG, Lokeshwar BL, Pflugfelder SC. Regulation of MMP-9 activity in human tear fluid and corneal epithelial culture supernatant. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000 Jun;41(7):1703-9.
  103. Torkildsen GL, Sanfilippo CM, DeCory HH, Gomes PJ. Evaluation of Efficacy and Safety of Brimonidine Tartrate Ophthalmic Solution, 0.025% for Treatment of Ocular Redness. Curr Eye Res. 2018 Jan;43(1):43-51.
  104. Santosh KV. Demodex follicularum in a KOH preparation of skin. Wikimedia Commons. CC BY 2.0, Published December 13, 2016. Accessed March 16, 2022.1.
  105. Whittal A. Fotografia microscópica do ácaro demodex brevis. Wikimedia Commons. CC0 1.0, Published October 9, 2015. Accessed March 16, 2022.
  106. Ozoe Y, Asahi M, Ozoe F, et al. The antiparasitic isoxazoline A1443 is a potent blocker of insect ligand-gated chloride channels. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2010;391(1):744-749. doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2009.11.131
  107. Gonzalez-Salinas R, Yeu E, Holdbrook M, et al. Collarette Elimination and Demodex Mite Eradication with Topical Lotilaner Ophthalmic Solution, 0.25. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 2021;37(8):479-484. doi:10.1089/jop.2021.0011
  108. Yeu E, Wirta DL, Karpecki P, Baba SN, Holdbrook M; Saturn I Study Group. Lotilaner Ophthalmic Solution, 0.25%, for the Treatment of Demodex Blepharitis: Results of a Prospective, Randomized, Vehicle-Controlled, Double-Masked, Pivotal Trial (Saturn-1). Cornea. 2023;42(4):435-443. doi:10.1097/ICO.0000000000003097
  109. Gaddie IB, Donnenfeld ED, Karpecki P, et al. Lotilaner Ophthalmic Solution 0.25% for Demodex Blepharitis: Randomized, Vehicle-Controlled, Multicenter, Phase 3 Trial (Saturn-2) [published online ahead of print, 2023 Jun 5]. Ophthalmology. 2023;S0161-6420(23)00392-5. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2023.05.030
  110. Yeu E, Mun JJ, Vollmer P, et al. Treatment of Demodex Blepharitis with Lotilaner Ophthalmic Solution, 0.25%: Combined Analysis of Two Pivotal Randomized, Vehicle-Controlled, Multicenter Trials. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2023;64(8):1164.
  111. Tarsus Pharmaceuticals. FDA approves XDEMVYTM;(Lotilaner Ophthalmic Solution) 0.25% for the treatment of demodex blepharitis. Tarsus Pharmaceuticals. Published July 25, 2023. Accessed September 4, 2023.
  112. McGee SR, Miller M, Kaiser E. FDA approves XDEMVY, the first and only treatment for demodex blepharitis. Optometry Times. Published July 31, 2023. Accessed September 3, 2023.
  113. Sheppard JD, Nichols KK. Dry Eye Disease Associated with Meibomian Gland Dysfunction: Focus on Tear Film Characteristics and the Therapeutic Landscape. Ophthalmol Ther. 2023;12(3):1397-1418. doi:10.1007/s40123-023-00669-1
  114. Vittitow J, Kissling R, DeCory H, et al. In Vitro Inhibition of Evaporation with Perfluorohexyloctane, an Eye Drop for Dry Eye Disease. Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2023;98:100704. doi:10.1016/j.curtheres.2023.100704
  115. Liu X, Riess JG, Krafft MP. Self-Organization of Semifluorinated Alkanes and Related Compounds at Interfaces: Thin Films, Surface Domains and Two-Dimensional Spherulites. Bulletin of the Chemical Society of Japan. 2018;91(5):846-857. doi:10.1246/bcsj.20170431
  116. Epitropoulos AT, Daya SM, Matossian C, et al. OC-01 (Varenicline Solution) Nasal Spray Demonstrates Consistency of Effect Regardless of Age, Race, Ethnicity, and Artificial Tear Use. Clin Ophthalmol. 2022;16:3405-3413. Published 2022 Oct 13. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S383091
  117. Frampton JE. Varenicline Solution Nasal Spray: A Review in Dry Eye Disease. Drugs. 2022;82(14):1481-1488. doi:10.1007/s40265-022-01782-4
Cory J. Lappin, OD, MS, FAAO
About Cory J. Lappin, OD, MS, FAAO

Dr. Cory J. Lappin is a native of New Philadelphia, Ohio and received his Bachelor of Science degree from Miami University, graduating Phi Beta Kappa with Honors with Distinction. He earned his Doctor of Optometry degree from The Ohio State University College of Optometry, where he concurrently completed his Master of Science degree in Vision Science. At the college he served as Class President and was a member of Beta Sigma Kappa Honor Society. Following graduation, Dr. Lappin continued his training by completing a residency in Ocular Disease at the renowned Cincinnati Eye Institute in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Dr. Lappin has been recognized for his clinical achievements, receiving the American Academy of Optometry Foundation Practice Excellence award. He has also been actively engaged in research, being selected to take part in the NIH/NEI T35 research training program and receiving the Vincent J. Ellerbrock Memorial Award in recognition of accomplishments in vision science research.

Dr. Lappin practices at Phoenix Eye Care and the Dry Eye Center of Arizona in Phoenix, Arizona, where he treats a wide variety of ocular diseases, with a particular interest in dry eye and ocular surface disease. He is a Fellow of the American Academy of Optometry, a member of the American Optometric Association, and serves on the Board of Directors for the Arizona Optometric Association. He is also a member of the Tear Film and Ocular Surface Society (TFOS) and volunteers with the Special Olympics Opening Eyes program.

Cory J. Lappin, OD, MS, FAAO
How would you rate the quality of this content?
Eyes On Eyecare Site Sponsors
Astellas LogoOptilight by Lumenis Logo