Published in Ocular Surface

The Ultimate Guide to OptiPLUS with OptiLIGHT for Dry Eye

This post is sponsored by Lumenis

Dry Eye disease is a complex, multifactorial condition that often requires a comprehensive treatment plan. Join Drs. Lappin and Jaccoma as they discuss using OptiPLUS with OptiLIGHT to manage dry eye disease in their optometry and ophthalmology practices.

The Ultimate Guide to OptiPLUS with OptiLIGHT for Dry Eye

Dry eye disease in eye care

Dry eye disease (DED) is one of the most routinely encountered conditions in eye care, with an estimated 38 million people affected by the condition in the U.S., although the true number of those suffering from DED is likely even higher.1 Dry eye disease is a multifactorial condition, with numerous contributory factors that disrupt and destabilize the tear film, ultimately leading to a loss of ocular surface homeostasis.2
Traditionally, DED has been classified into two categories: aqueous-deficient dry eye (ADDE) and evaporative dry eye (EDE). ADDE refers to cases of DED caused by a lack of aqueous tear production. In contrast, EDE is characterized by premature evaporation of the tear film primarily due to poor tear quality.3 In actuality, many cases of DED exist on a continuum with a mixture of elements of both ADDE and EDE,3 with nearly 86% having an evaporative component.4 This premature evaporation of the tear film typically stems from meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD).
MGD itself is a multifactorial condition that leads to underproduction of meibum or production of poor-quality meibum that fails to prevent tear film evaporation adequately.5 Other common ocular surface diseases can contribute to DED and MGD, such as Demodex and bacterial blepharitis, which can destabilize the tear film and obstruct and damage the meibomian glands and lid margin,6-10 as well as ocular rosacea, which causes the development of proinflammatory telangiectatic blood vessels and also disrupts the function of the meibomian glands.11 Additionally, physical changes to eyelid architecture and blinking mechanics can impede proper tear secretion, which can also impact DED.12 Each of these conditions can contribute to DED, as can many others, which makes it a particularly complex condition to manage (Figure 1).
figure 1
Figure 1. Common conditions that contribute to MGD/DED
The loss of tear film homeostasis associated with DED can result in numerous signs and symptoms, including erythema, feelings of dryness, burning, stinging, itching, foreign body sensation, fluctuating vision, epiphora, and general irritation.3
call out box 1
There are numerous treatment options available for DED. These include primarily palliative OTC treatments like artificial tears and warm compresses, which largely “kick the can down the road” by allowing an eye to feel better but do not necessarily improve the ability of the tear apparatus to make a better tear, lid hygiene (lid scrubs, foams, and sprays) and dietary supplements (omega-3 fatty acids, antioxidants). Prescription therapies such as immunomodulators, neurostimulators, and tear film stabilizers, and advanced in-office procedures such as microblepharoexfoliation, ocular surface lavage, thermal treatments and expression, intense pulsed light, and radiofrequency all share the purpose of improving tear quality and/or production through various mechanisms of action.
Given the multifactorial nature of DED, most patients will require multiple treatments from several of the categories to manage their condition fully.30,31 However, in more severe cases of DED or in cases where a patient simply wishes to reduce the number of treatments needed on a day-to-day basis, advanced treatments such as (on-label) intense pulsed light (IPL) and/or (off-label) radiofrequency (RF) can be excellent or even necessary therapeutic options to manage the disease.

OptiLIGHT and DED

OptiLIGHT is a light-based therapy that delivers intense pulsed light to target tissues in the periocular region to address DED and MGD.32 Intense pulsed light utilizes a xenon flash lamp to produce wavelengths in the range of 400 to 1200 nm.33-35 By its very nature, the light produced is not a laser, as it is polychromatic and noncoherent.33 The intense pulsed light produced by OptiLIGHT is absorbed by pigmented structures within the target tissue, with the resulting effects determined by the specific wavelengths of light produced and the areas treated.33,36-39
Longer, lower energy wavelengths penetrate more deeply, whereas shorter, higher energy wavelengths of light do not penetrate as deeply and therefore deliver energy more superficially.33,40 For this reason, the different wavelengths of light produced by OptiLIGHT will be absorbed by pigments, or chromophores, at varying tissue depths in the periocular area.33,40 Therefore, cutoff filters are used to produce specific wavelengths that will penetrate to the desired depths and target tissues.33 A 590 nm high pass cutoff filter is commonly used in the treatment of DED and MGD, as it produces wavelengths of 590 nm and above, corresponding to yellow, orange, red, and near-infrared light, while attenuating shorter wavelengths.36,41-44
Once the light energy is absorbed by chromophores contained within the target tissues, it produces its therapeutic effects through several processes, including photobiomodulation (PBM). Photobiomodulation refers to the delivery of energy to tissues in the form of visible and infrared light, which stimulates intracellular biological processes through photochemical reactions that can have effects at the protein and gene levels.36,37,41,45,46 Ultimately PBM is thought to target cytochrome c oxidase (COX), which is a chromophore contained in the mitochondria of cells that absorbs the light energy produced by OptiLIGHT.37,47,48
COX is also an enzyme that is responsible for producing adenosine triphosphate (ATP) as part of the electron transport chain (ETC).37,47-49 When COX absorbs the light energy produced by OptiLIGHT, it causes photoexcitation of the enzyme, which increases the function of the ETC, and, ultimately, increases production of ATP.37,47-49 ATP provides a form of cellular energy and enhances the function of intra- and extracellular exchange structures, including pumps and transporters, which results in an increase in free intracellular calcium.37,47,48,50 It has also been proposed that, as a separate or complementary mechanism, the light energy produced by IPL may cause physical vibrations of cellular calcium channels, increasing their permeability and consequently increasing levels of free intracellular calcium.46
Regardless of its source, calcium acts as a key signaling molecule that can stimulate cell proliferation, migration, and differentiation, in addition to cellular repair and healing.36,51-53 Therefore, PBM is thought to stimulate tissue repair and regeneration through action on multiple cell types, including fibroblasts, keratinocytes, T cells, and macrophages.36,54-56 There are multiple beneficial effects to activating these cells, as fibroblasts stimulate cell proliferation and collagen synthesis,57 keratinocytes regulate epithelial wound healing,58 T cells control immune and inflammatory responses,59 and macrophages clear dead cells and proinflammatory debris.60
Photobiomodulation is also thought to produce anti-inflammatory effects, including an increase in antioxidants and a decrease in stress-related genetic material that is associated with cell death.61 Local blood flow may also be increased by PBM, which aids in healing and tissue repair, either through enhanced production of nitric oxide, a potent vasodilator, via increased activity of nitrite reductase, or through the dissociation of nitric oxide from COX upon photoexcitation.62
Additionally, OptiLIGHT has general anti-inflammatory effects, as it increases the production of anti-inflammatory molecules, such as IL-10, and decreases the levels of proinflammatory factors like IL-6.37,63-65 Other factors that influence T cell production on the ocular surface include TGF-β,66,67 TNF-α,68 and MMPs.69,70 TGFβ can be both pro- and anti-inflammatory and can also be modulated by OptiLIGHT.67 The use of OptiLIGHT can decrease TGF-β levels when using low fluences and vice versa,66 whereas TNF-α, which is involved in acute inflammation, is decreased by IPL.68 This decrease in TNF-α has the downstream benefit of decreasing MMP levels, as TNF-α is involved in MMP production.68,71 Additionally, MMP production is reduced by IPL at the mRNA level as well.69
OptiLIGHT also appears to influence the levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS), or free radicals, present in the tear film following an Arndt-Schultz curve.72,73 According to this model, ROS increases when low energy levels of IPL energy are utilized, whereas higher energy levels have antioxidative effects.37 A decrease in ROS would be beneficial as free radicals can create damage through oxidative stress,74 whereas an increase may also be beneficial in terms of ocular surface disease, as the increase in free radicals may potentially have antimicrobial effects that could reduce the bacterial burden on the lids and lashes.37
In terms of clinical application, the effects of OptiLIGHT confer several potential benefits for dry eye patients as it has been shown to address DED by improving meibomian gland structure and function,32,37,75-79 destroying proinflammatory telangiectatic vessels associated with ocular rosacea,36,38,63,80 decreasing inflammation,37,63-66, 68,69,81-83 and reducing the microbial burden on the lids.37,36,84,85

OptiLIGHT and MGD

Although IPL has been shown to improve meibomian gland structure, function, and meibum quality,32,75-79,86 the mechanisms by which these improvements occur may differ. The light energy produced by OptiLIGHT is thought to liquify stagnant meibum, thereby improving meibum quality and clearing obstruction from the glands.75-77,86 However, it is controversial as to whether this process is due to “true” thermal melting of the oil or through a photochemical process, as the heat produced by the light rapidly dissipates and consequently may not be sustained for an adequate duration to result in melting of the meibum.37,87-90 Additionally, MGD may improve due to the effects of PBM, as enhanced cellular activity can potentially increase meibocyte proliferation. Meibocytes are cells that are produced by the meibomian glands that ultimately break down and form meibum,91-93 so by increasing meibocyte proliferation, meibum production may be enhanced as well.

OptiLIGHT and ocular rosacea

Another major benefit of OptiLIGHT is its impact on the proinflammatory telangiectatic vessels that are associated with ocular rosacea. Hemoglobin found in red blood cells is a chromophore and selectively absorbs light energy produced by OptiLIGHT, which results in rapid heating that causes the blood to coagulate and the vessel to involute.36,80 Destroying these abnormal vessels reduces inflammation as they can secrete proinflammatory factors.38,80,87 The destruction of the vessels may also improve cosmetic appearance by reducing associated erythema.38

OptiLIGHT and blepharitis

An overpopulation of the microbes of our skin’s natural microbiome, especially staphylococcal bacterial species and Demodex mites, is a common cause of blepharitis and can act as a contributory factor to DED and MGD.6-8,10,94-100 Waste products and digestive enzymes produced by these microbes can destabilize the tear film and cause chronic inflammation.8,9,95-97 Demodex mites also harbor bacteria on and inside their bodies, which can contribute to an overabundance of bacteria.101-104 OptiLIGHT can help address these issues as light energy is absorbed by chromophores in the chitinous exoskeleton of Demodex, causing rapid heating and coagulative necrosis of the mites, thereby reducing the microbial burden around the ocular surface.84

OptiLIGHT and clinical studies

Lumenis’ IPL technology demonstrated its safety and efficacy in the improvement of signs of dry eye due to MGD in a multicenter, double-blinded, randomized controlled clinical trial.32 There are numerous other studies demonstrating the benefits of Lumenis IPL with Optimal Pulse Technology (OPT) as well, including a clinical study by Dell et al that showed improvement in meibomian gland function and meibum quality after IPL treatment in addition to a significant impact on tear breakup time, with TBUT nearly doubling after a full series of treatments.86 The use of Lumenis’ light technology has also been shown to decrease inflammation,63,77 improve meibomian gland structure,77,105 destroy pro-inflammatory telangiectatic blood vessels,38,80 and decrease the microbial load in the periocular area, including Demodex mites.85

What makes OptiLIGHT unique?

Although there are other IPL devices that are FDA-cleared, Lumenis’ IPL technology is currently the only IPL treatment FDA-approved for MGD and dry eye.79 This means that Lumenis’ IPL technology has specifically demonstrated safety and efficacy for the management of MGD and dry eye, which is backed by clinical studies. Conversely, FDA-cleared devices have shown their technology to be “substantially equivalent” or similar to another device without having to demonstrate their safety and efficacy in clinical studies directly.106,107 Practically, this means using OptiLIGHT to treat dry eye and MGD is an on-label indication, whereas the use of an FDA-cleared device to treat these conditions is technically off-label if that device does not carry the specific indication for the treatment of dry eye and MGD.108 Additionally, FDA approval can potentially confer medicolegal benefits as the device is being used for its intended purpose. Therefore, Lumenis’ light technology’s FDA approval provides users with confidence when managing dry eye and MGD, as the technology they are using is backed by clinical data and supported by a specific indication for use in these conditions.
OptiLIGHT has several key features that make it an ideal choice when using IPL for the management of MGD and dry eye disease. It utilizes SapphireCool technology in which a sapphire crystal lightguide is actively cooled, which allows for safe, comfortable treatment. In addition to the standard rectangular lightguide, OptiLIGHT also includes the OPT handpiece that consists of a smaller cylindrical lightguide and Opti-Tip disposable tip that are ideal for treating delicate or hard-to-reach places. Additionally, the delivery of light energy itself is unique with OptiLight as it employs Optimal Pulse Technology (OPT) that uses a triple-pulse pattern to emit three pulsed flashes of light of a duration of 4-20 ms per pulse with a 5-150 ms relaxation time between pulses with each “shot,” allowing for optimal, consistent delivery of energy that avoids spiking between shots. OptiLIGHT also has built-in settings based on validated data from hundreds of patients to ensure safe and effective treatment. This is in significant contradistinction from common “broadband” IPL devices, which deliver a wide spectrum of light in pulses that, according to some analogies, can make a filtered Lumenis OptiLIGHT akin to a “sniper rifle” specifically targeting the wavelengths found to be at the heart of dry eye disease, as compared to the “hand grenade” of the broadband devices which spew a wide spectrum of light onto the surface, attempting to bludgeon all targets in a single “dose” of light. The selective photo-thermolysis approach utilized by Lumenis OptiLIGHT when treating the delicate skin and dry eye-related targets of the periocular surfaces is possibly what makes it the only FDA-approved system.

Patient selection and performing OptiLIGHT

As IPL can be beneficial for numerous ocular surface conditions, including dry eye, MGD, ocular rosacea, and microbial blepharitis, there are accordingly numerous patients who can potentially benefit from treatment with OptiLIGHT. Deciding which patients are good candidates for treatment begins with assessing their Fitzpatrick skin type.35,109 The Fitzpatrick skin type assessment uses a scale from I-VI, with I corresponding to a very fair complexion and VI indicating a dark complexion.110-112 The reason skin typing is critical to candidate selection for IPL treatment goes back to its core mechanism of action. The light energy delivered by IPL is absorbed by pigment; therefore, those with fairer complexions will have less pigmentation and absorb less energy, whereas individuals with darker skin have more pigmentation that absorbs more energy.35,109 For this reason, OptiLIGHT treatment is only recommended for Fitzpatrick types I-IV, as types V and VI are at greater risk for adverse events, such as burns or pigmentation changes, due to greater energy absorption.36,35,113
Accordingly, the OptiLIGHT treatment process begins with determining a patient’s Fitzpatrick skin type. Once this has been established, you simply enter this value into the OptiLIGHT interface and it will provide the recommended fluence for treatment, which corresponds to the amount of energy delivered per unit area. Determining the appropriate fluence is vital, as most adverse reactions that occur with IPL treatment are related to using fluence values that are too high.109 It is also crucial to note that Fitzpatrick skin type and fluence have an inverse relationship. When a patient has a lower Fitzpatrick skin type, such as type I, they will require a higher fluence than someone with a Fitzpatrick skin type of IV. This is because lower Fitzpatrick skin types have less pigmentation and therefore will have a lesser ability to absorb light energy compared to a higher Fitzpatrick type that represents a greater amount of pigmentation that will more readily absorb light energy. Therefore, lower Fitzpatrick skin types need higher fluence values to get adequate energy absorption compared to higher Fitzpatrick types that more easily absorb energy at lower fluences. For this reason, if a patient is on the borderline between Fitzpatrick skin types, it is recommended to go with the higher Fitzpatrick skin type and reduce the fluence accordingly. Additionally, if there is ever a question as to how a patient may react to IPL, it is recommended to perform a “test shot” prior to full treatment. This involves applying one to two shots, typically to an inconspicuous location on the neck or arm, and then waiting one week to assess tolerability and verify there are no adverse reactions.
Once a patient’s Fitzpatrick skin type has been assessed and the corresponding fluence determined, they are ready to be prepped for treatment. This involves covering the eyes with adhesive eye patches with goggles or protective OPT Shields. Those performing the treatment should wear protective eyewear as well. After the shields have been applied, clear, fragrance-free ultrasound gel is applied from tragus to tragus over the nose, as this region will serve as the treatment area.32,36,35 It is important to ensure the ultrasound gel is clear, as any dyes or pigments could potentially interfere with light reaching the target tissue, as the coupling gel improves comfort and energy delivery. Shots are then applied from tragus to tragus over the nose with an overlap of no greater than 1 mm between applications. This is repeated twice for a total of two passes. The gel and ocular protection are then removed.
Aftercare is also crucial as patients will be more sun-sensitive after treatment. Therefore, patients should be advised to wear sunscreen and avoid excessive sun exposure for two weeks following treatment, especially in the initial 48 hours after the procedure.114-116 Additionally, abrasive facial scrubs and the use of retinol-containing products should be avoided; however, the use of a gentle moisturizer can be beneficial.36,117,118 Treatments are typically well-tolerated, though some patients may experience redness and irritation that is usually mild and transient.35
This process is repeated for four total sessions, typically spaced two weeks apart, followed by maintenance treatments that are usually performed every 6-12 months or as needed.36,38 Follow-up evaluation is recommended four to six weeks after completion of the fourth treatment.
call out box 2
Other considerations include the presence of melasma, which can potentially darken with IPL treatment; however, IPL has also been used to treat melasma, so the use of IPL with this condition is controversial.120,121 This is also true of the erythematous malar rash associated with SLE, which can potentially be exacerbated by IPL use, although it too has been utilized as a treatment for this condition.122,123 Accordingly, if these conditions are present, they should be approached with caution and all risks, benefits, and alternatives discussed with the patient. Therefore, there is a degree of clinical judgment to be exercised when performing IPL treatment.
Additionally, the use of concurrent oral doxycycline is also somewhat controversial. One potential side effect of doxycycline use is increased photosensitivity. However, it is thought that the photosensitive reactions that are associated with doxycycline are related to exposure to UV-light, which is not part of the light spectrum emitted during IPL treatment.124 In fact, it has been shown that patients who underwent IPL treatment while concurrently using doxycycline did not experience any adverse photosensitivity-related effects.124
In patients with a history of cold sores or herpetic infection but without active lesions, it can be beneficial to prescribe oral antivirals prophylactically prior to treatment to avoid potential reactivation.33

Discussing OptiLIGHT with patients

Like any procedure, education is key when discussing OptiLIGHT treatment with patients. Reviewing a patient’s individual ocular surface conditions, such as dry eye, MGD, or ocular rosacea, and then explaining how treatment with OptiLIGHT specifically benefits these areas can be an effective way to both provide education and encourage patients to embrace treatment.
Having a patient education script can facilitate discussions about OptiLIGHT treatment, and Dr. Lappin shares his.
dr lappin script
Setting expectations is also key to successful treatment with OptiLIGHT. It’s important to always tell patients from the start that four treatment sessions are considered a standard treatment series, and therefore, they need to perform at least four treatments to serve as a foundation. Explain to patients that since the procedure is based on energy delivery, it can take time to take effect and that, from experience, many patients will not be able to feel much of a difference until the third or fourth treatment. This education is crucial, as patients may otherwise begin to worry that their treatment is ineffective if they do not immediately notice a difference, especially if they still cannot notice a change after the second treatment. So, by setting this expectation, it helps provide patients with a better understanding of their treatment timeline. In addition to this, implement objective dry eye testing such as meibography, tear meniscus height analysis, TBUT, and lipid layer interferometry, and perform these tests before and after treatment. In many cases, improvements in symptoms can lag behind improvement in signs, so it can be incredibly beneficial to show patients that they have experienced improvement in their objective testing even if they have not yet noticed improvement in their symptoms.
Additionally, explain that they will eventually need repeat treatment for maintenance after their initial series; however, let them know that it will be tailored to meet their individual needs. This helps prevent any confusion, as some patients may otherwise assume that their initial treatment series will be all that is required. This understanding also helps patients track their condition. Advise them that an increase in symptoms after completing treatment, even if nothing else in their treatment plan has changed, can be a sign that they may be in need of a maintenance session.


OptiPLUS and DED

Radiofrequency (RF) can improve MGD by delivering heat to the meibomian glands via radio waves,125,126 especially when used in conjunction with IPL, as demonstrated by pairing the use of OptiLIGHT IPL and OptiPLUS RF technologies.127 A benefit of using RF is that heat can be delivered to specific tissue depths by altering the frequency of the generated radio waves.128,129 Additionally, RF stimulates collagen synthesis, which can increase lid tone and potentially improve blinking mechanics, which in turn can enhance meibum secretion and tear spreading over the ocular surface.127,128,130
RF functions through the production of a rapidly alternating electrical current that flows through the target tissue. Water molecules contained within the tissue are polar, as they have both positively charged and negatively charged regions. When the electrical current alternates, it causes the water molecules to rapidly change position, which results in friction that generates the heat delivered by RF treatments.125,127,131
Monopolar RF delivers a “cloud” of vibrational energy deep into the tissue, with the energy grounding occurring at a distant “neutral plate,” typically placed on bare skin between the shoulder blades. This configuration allows for a deeper and more beneficial energy flow into the skin. In contrast, bipolar RF sends a focused “arc” of vibrational energy directly into the skin, with the tip of this arc generally defined as half the distance between the electrodes in the handpiece tip. A grounding plate is unnecessary in this case, as the energy flow occurs solely between the two surface electrodes.132
Both monopolar and bipolar RF techniques are influenced by various factors affecting the depth, area, and amount of heat generated. In monopolar RF, the type of electrode that contacts the skin is crucial to consider. In bipolar RF, the distance between the two surface electrodes in contact with the skin plays a critical role.132 Monopolar RF is particularly advantageous because it ensures optimized contact around the eyes, enhancing patient comfort and safety.133
For both monopolar and bipolar frequencies, heat is produced by the vibration of water molecules within the tissue. This process is regulated by:132
  • The power or energy applied
  • The frequency of the waves
  • The size of the electrode in contact with the skin
Importantly, the frequency of the RF determines the depth of penetration, with lower frequencies allowing for deeper penetration than higher frequencies. Therefore, in areas where the skin is thicker or where the target is located deeper, the ability to easily adjust the frequency for the desired outcome is essential for optimal results.132

OptiPLUS and clinical studies

Clinical studies have shown that the results of OptiLIGHT treatments are enhanced by the addition of OptiPLUS. The combination of dual-frequency RF and OPT technology significantly improves the expressibility of meibomian glands, the clarity of meibum, and the associated symptoms.127

What makes OptiPLUS unique?

Some unique features and functions of OptiPLUS include its use of dual-frequency technology, user-friendly design, and its ability to cater to diverse skin types, regardless of Fitzpatrick skin type. Its monopolar nature allows for deeper penetration and treatment.
Dual-frequency RF technology allows for precise heat delivery across different skin tissue layers. It effectively targets both the meibomian glands in the deeper tarsal plate and the superficial skin to enhance collagen production.127,128 Clinical trials indicate that this treatment is safe and effective in reducing the signs and symptoms of dry eye disease.134,135
Applications in optometric and ophthalmic practice include maximizing the results of OptiPLUS treatments and promoting aesthetic advancement, as well as enhancing collagen synthesis for facial skin rejuvenation.

Patient selection and performing OptiPLUS

When a clinical exam has demonstrated that there is some degree of MGD responsible for a patient’s dry eye disease, which is the vast majority, OptiPLUS will commonly provide some measure of relief. Not all MGD is caused by physical gland obstructions by waxy, toothpaste-like meibum or scar tissue, as has been demonstrated using confocal imaging that shows intra- and peri-ductal fibrosis.136-138 Some cases are primarily inflammatory in nature, as is the case in more classic rosacea-related disease, where gland expression produces thin, easily expressed oils that are sometimes turbid or mixed with foamy residues (in which one can use the analogy of meibum being like kerosene when extra virgin olive oil would be preferred). It is therefore important to keep in mind that heated expression alone is not always capable of fully correcting all cases of MGD. That said, it appears that waxy plugs are common to many cases of obstructive MGD and that effective melting and expression of these clogs is capable of restoring the function of these glands.139 Additionally, clinical observation has shown that simply turning over the older “less healthy” oils in the course of a treatment appears to benefit the production of newer, fresher, better oils. Heat can dilate orifices, make oils flow more easily, and help achieve the goal of efficiently turning oils over more completely, regardless of the cause of the MGD (barring total gland atrophy).
The OptiPLUS protocol for dry eye involves a six-minute treatment for each eye, which is divided into two, three-minute segments. Before starting treatment, a grounding pad is placed on the bare skin of the patient’s back, typically between the shoulder blades. A conducting cream is then applied to the skin beneath the eye. The electrode is then moved in a C-shaped pattern below the lower eyelid. OptiPLUS uses dual-frequency technology, so during the first segment, a lower energy frequency (1 MHz) is utilized, which targets the meibomian glands, while the second segment uses a higher frequency (4 MHz) that is more superficially acting, which delivers heat to the skin of the eyelids and periorbital region.140 The use of different frequencies allows for heat delivery to specific depths and targets, which is the key to RF’s particular efficacy, as the thermal energy produced can be delivered much more directly and efficiently. This targeted heat delivery facilitates exceptional post-treatment gland expression quality.
During treatment, no local, oral, or systemic anesthetics should be used as the patient needs to be able to provide real-time feedback on their comfort level (which can help avoid over-treatment that can result in adverse outcomes such as burns). The patient should also be insulated from metal objects, especially those with which they may be in direct contact with (such as portions of the treatment chair). Skin temperature should be kept to 38-42° C, as this temperature range promotes collagen production.141,142 However, temperatures of 43° C and above should be avoided in the periocular region as this can result in fat lysis.143 During treatment with OptiPLUS, skin temperature is actively monitored to allow for safe and effective treatment, and heat delivery can be modified by altering the power as well as how quickly the electrode is moved over the treatment area (faster motion can result in lowering of skin temperature as the quicker contact time allows heat to dissipate).
call out box 3
Potential side effects should be discussed, which can include:
  • Moderate burning sensation, burns, erythema, edema, blistering, moderate pain, purpura in the exposure area, mild swelling, a feeling of the ear being clogged, and jaw tightness

Discussing OptiPLUS with patients

It’s best to talk with patients about how OptiPlus can help reduce inflammation, clear blocked meibomian glands, and enhance tear production. Although this can be difficult, Dr. Jacooma shares the patient education script he uses.
dr jaccoma script

OptiLIGHT + OptiPLUS for dry eye

Due to their mechanisms of action, performing OptiLIGHT and OptiPLUS together has a synergistic effect. A study by Chelnis et al. showed that when OptiLIGHT and OptiPLUS were performed together, there was a significant increase in the number of expressible meibomian glands as well as improvements in meibum quality and patient symptoms.127

The Case for Addressing Ocular Aesthetics in Clinical Practice

Although OptiLIGHT and OptiPLUS are focused on treating the signs and symptoms of dry eye, they also provide intrinsic cosmetic benefits. Adding such ocular aesthetics into clinical practice can provide practice differentiation, growth, and revenue opportunities. By addressing the cosmetic concerns associated with dry eye and ocular surface disease, you are effectively treating the whole patient, which optimizes the patient experience by improving self-esteem and addressing the patient’s mental state, which can be impacted by self-image.

Aesthetics and function

The cosmetic impact of ocular surface disease on the eyes and periocular region is often a major source of concern for ocular surface disease patients, sometimes being even more important to the patient than irritation or discomfort. This is not surprising considering the critical role the eyes play in social interactions, including eye contact and nonverbal communication.144 Additionally, the eyes are considered the most attractive facial feature by both men and women.145 Therefore, ocular and periocular cosmetic concerns can have a major psychological impact on patients’ well-being and quality of life.146 Although “aesthetic” treatments are often placed in a separate category from treatments for “health,” the two are often intertwined, especially when it comes to ocular health. In fact, features that are considered “traditionally attractive” are often associated with health and vitality and accordingly referred to as “healthy” looking.147-151
We see this relationship particularly well when treating the ocular surface with OptiLIGHT and OptiPLUS. Firm lid tone is not only considered healthy and attractive, but there is a functional component to this as well. The eyelids and blinking mechanics are intrinsically tied to meibum and overall tear secretion, as well as the proper spreading of tears over the ocular surface.12,93,152-155 As skin naturally loses its rigidity and elasticity with age, this can lead to inadequate lid closure and poor lid apposition against the globe, which can interfere with proper blinking and tear secretion,156,157 in addition to the “tired” or “droopy” appearance that is a common complaint amongst patients. However, OptiLIGHT and OptiPLUS can both enhance fibroblast activity and collagen synthesis to help restore rigidity and elasticity to the lid skin, which in turn not only improves the cosmetic appearance of the eyes but may also indirectly improve MGD via improved blinking mechanics and lid tone.37,54,57,69,127,128,130,158,159

Integrating OptiLIGHT + OptiPLUS into your practice

A major concern many eyecare providers have when implementing technologies like OptiLIGHT and OptiPLUS into their practices is how to approach the discussion of cost with patients, as these treatments are not covered by insurance. While there are many different ways to approach this subject, Dr. Lappin has personally found the simplest and most effective way is to have an upfront and honest conversation, keeping the focus on the patient’s condition, and empowering the patient to take ownership of the decision. This begins with proper education surrounding how OptiLIGHT and OptiPLUS will address and benefit a patient’s specific issues. After the patient has a firm understanding of how OptiLIGHT and OptiPLUS work, it is easier to have an informed discussion around cost-benefit analysis.
It’s important to explain that these treatments are not covered by insurance, and that this is typical for most dry eye-related in-office therapies. As doctors, it should never be our job to “sell” our patients on a treatment or to pressure them into a decision. In fact, Dr. Lappin routinely tells patients he does not want them to do a procedure unless they are 100% on board. It is simply our responsibility to educate them on their condition, the treatment options available, and answer any questions they may have to help them make the decision that is right for them. By using this straightforward approach, there is greater patient acceptance as it empowers the patient to make an informed choice about their treatment by providing all the necessary information.
It is also a good practice to educate all staff members on the basics of OptiLIGHT and OptiPLUS treatment. This allows them to answer any questions that may arise, especially when you may not be available to answer them, while also building patient confidence in the treatments by ensuring there is a consistent message within your practice.


Incorporating OptiLIGHT + OptiPLUS into practice flow

Determining the logistics surrounding a new treatment is often just as important as the procedure itself, and this remains true for OptiLIGHT and OptiPLUS. Both procedures can be performed by a doctor or by an appropriately trained staff member. OptiLIGHT is a relatively short procedure, typically taking around 15 minutes, often with 5-10 minutes of that being hands-on treatment time, whereas OptiPLUS takes about 20 minutes between setup time and the 6-minute per eye treatment. In Dr. Lappin’s office, we perform OptiLIGHT and OptiPLUS at the same visit, back-to-back, starting with OptiLIGHT and then finishing with OptiPLUS. Although both procedures can easily be performed the same day as a dry eye evaluation, we have found a “procedure day” works best for office flow by scheduling all OptiLIGHT and OptiPLUS procedures on the same day, back-to-back as this allows for a consistent flow and maximizes the number of treatments that can be performed without disrupting the established schedule. Also, we found it is important to answer as many questions as possible before the day of treatment, as the most common source of disruption to the flow of a procedure day is extensive patient questions or concerns that would have been better addressed beforehand.

In summary

OptiLIGHT and OptiPLUS offer powerful treatment options for our dry eye patients. Pairing the unique OPT IPL of OptiLIGHT and the dual-frequency RF technology of OptiPLUS allows doctors to effectively manage the multifactorial nature of dry eye disease by addressing several of the contributing factors to DED, while also providing a side-benefit of improving cosmetic appearance. This empowers doctors to treat the “whole” patient while also building and growing their practices.
  1. 2021 Dry eye products market report: global analysis for 2020 to 2026. Market Scope. Accessed December 8, 2024. https://www.market-scope.com/pages/reports/219/2020-dry-eye-products-market-report-a-global-analysis-for-2019-to-2025-october-2020.
  2. Craig JP, Nichols KK, Akpek EK, et al. TFOS DEWS II definition and classification report. Ocul Surf. 2017;15(3):276-283. doi:10.1016/j.jtos.2017.05.008
  3. Golden MI, Meyer JJ, Zeppieri M, et al. Dry Eye Syndrome. [Updated 2024 Feb 29]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK470411/
  4. Lemp MA, Crews LA, Bron AJ, et al. Distribution of aqueous-deficient and evaporative dry eye in a clinic-based patient cohort: a retrospective study. Cornea. 2012;31(5):472-478. doi:10.1097/ICO.0b013e318225415a
  5. Baudouin C, Messmer EM, Aragona P, et al. Revisiting the vicious circle of dry eye disease: a focus on the pathophysiology of meibomian gland dysfunction. Br J Ophthalmol. 2016;100(3):300-306. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307415
  6. Fromstein SR, Harthan JS, Patel J, Opitz DL. Demodex blepharitis: clinical perspectives. Clin Optom (Auckl). 2018;10:57-63.
  7. Bhandari V, Reddy JK. Blepharitis: always remember demodex. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2014;21(4):317-320.
  8. Nicholls SG, Oakley CL, Tan A, Vote BJ. Demodex species in human ocular disease: new clinicopathological aspects. Int Ophthalmol. 2017;37(1):303-312.
  9. Liang L, Ding X, Tseng SC. High prevalence of demodex brevis infestation in chalazia. Am J Ophthalmol. 2014 Feb;157(2):342-348.e1.
  10. English FP, Nutting WB. Demodicosis of ophthalmic concern. Am J Ophthalmol. 1981;91(3):362-372.
  11. Oltz M, Check J. Rosacea and its ocular manifestations. Optometry. 2011;82(2):92-103.
  12. Kawashima M, Tsubota K. Tear lipid layer deficiency associated with incomplete blinking: a case report. BMC Ophthalmol. 2013;13:34. doi:10.1186/1471-2415-13-34
  13. Pellegrini M, Bernabei F, Moscardelli F, et al. Assessment of Corneal Fluorescein Staining in Different Dry Eye Subtypes Using Digital Image Analysis. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2019;8(6):34. Published 2019 Dec 12. doi:10.1167/tvst.8.6.34
  14. Mainstone JC, Bruce AS, Golding TR. Tear meniscus measurement in the diagnosis of dry eye. Curr Eye Res. 1996;15(6):653-661. doi:10.3109/02713689609008906
  15. Pult H, Riede-Pult BH. Impact of conjunctival folds on central tear meniscus height. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015;56(3):1459-1466. doi:10.1167/iovs.14-15908
  16. Tung CI, Perin AF, Gumus K, et al. Tear meniscus dimensions in tear dysfunction and their correlation with clinical parameters. Am J Ophthalmol. 2014;157(2):301-310.e1. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2013.09.024
  17. Shen M, Li J, Wang J, et al. Upper and lower tear menisci in the diagnosis of dry eye. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50(6):2722-2726. doi:10.1167/iovs.08-2704
  18. Zeev MS, Miller DD, Latkany R. Diagnosis of dry eye disease and emerging technologies. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014;8:581-590. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S45444
  19. Wang J, Palakuru JR, Aquavella JV. Correlations among upper and lower tear menisci, noninvasive tear break-up time, and the Schirmer test. Am J Ophthalmol. 2008;145(5):795-800. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2007.12.035
  20. Vidas Pauk S, Petriček I, Jukić T, et al. Noninvasive Tear Film Break-up Time Assessment Using Handheld Lipid Layer Examination Instrument. Acta Clin Croat. 2019;58(1):63-71. doi:10.20471/acc.2019.58.01.09
  21. Pflugfelder SC, Tseng SC, Sanabria O, et al. Evaluation of subjective assessments and objective diagnostic tests for diagnosing tear-film disorders known to cause ocular irritation. Cornea. 1998;17(1):38-56. doi:10.1097/00003226-199801000-00007
  22. Hirota M, Uozato H, Kawamorita T, Shibata Y, Yamamoto S. Effect of incomplete blinking on tear film stability. Optom Vis Sci. 2013;90(7):650-657. doi:10.1097/OPX.0b013e31829962ec
  23. Petriček I, Tomić M, Bulum T, Lešin Gaćina D, Vidas Pauk S. Meibomian Gland Assessment in Routine Ophthalmology Practice. Metabolites. 2023;13(2):157. Published 2023 Jan 20. doi:10.3390/metabo13020157
  24. Wolffsohn JS, Arita R, Chalmers R, et al. TFOS DEWS II Diagnostic Methodology report. Ocul Surf. 2017;15(3):539-574. doi:10.1016/j.jtos.2017.05.001
  25. Kaur K, Stokkermans TJ. Meibomian Gland Disease. [Updated 2024 Mar 3]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK580474/
  26. Kim WJ, Ahn YJ, Kim MH, Kim HS, Kim MS, Kim EC. Lipid layer thickness decrease due to meibomian gland dysfunction leads to tear film instability and reflex tear secretion. Ann Med. 2022;54(1):893-899. doi:10.1080/07853890.2022.2056238
  27. Swiderska K, Read ML, Blackie CA, Maldonado-Codina C, Morgan PB. Latest developments in meibography: A review. Ocul Surf. 2022;25:119-128. doi:10.1016/j.jtos.2022.06.002
  28. 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-
  29. Greiner JV, Ying GS, Pistilli M, Maguire MG, Asbell PA; Dry Eye Assessment and Management (DREAM) Study Research Group. Association of Tear Osmolarity With Signs and Symptoms of Dry Eye Disease in the Dry Eye Assessment and Management (DREAM) Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2023;64(1):5. doi:10.1167/iovs.64.1.5
  30. Shen Lee B, Kabat AG, Bacharach J, Karpecki P, Luchs J. Managing Dry Eye Disease and Facilitating Realistic Patient Expectations: A Review and Appraisal of Current Therapies. Clin Ophthalmol. 2020;14:119-126. Published 2020 Jan 14. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S228838
  31. Gupta PK, Toyos R, Sheppard JD, et al. Tolerability of Current Treatments for Dry Eye Disease: A Review of Approved and Investigational Therapies. Clin Ophthalmol. 2024;18:2283-2302. Published 2024 Aug 16. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S465143
  32. Toyos R, Desai NR, Toyos M, et al. Intense pulsed light improves signs and symptoms of dry eye disease due to meibomian gland dysfunction: A randomized controlled study. PLoS One. 2022;17(6):e0270268. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0270268
  33. Gade A, Vasile GF, Hohman MH, et al. Intense Pulsed Light (IPL) Therapy. [Updated 2024 Mar 1]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK580525/
  34. Babilas P, Schreml S, Szeimies RM, Landthaler M. Intense pulsed light (IPL): a review. Lasers Surg Med. 2010;42(2):93-104. doi:10.1002/lsm.20877
  35. 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
  36. Toyos R, Toyos M, Willcox J, et al. Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of intense pulsed light treatment with meibomian gland expression of the upper eyelids for dry eye disease. Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg. 2019;37(9):527-531. doi:10.1089/photob.2018.4599
  37. Dell SJ. Intense pulsed light for evaporative dry eye disease. Clin Ophthalmol. 2017;11:1167-1173.
  38. Papageorgiou P, Clayton W, Norwood S, et al. Treatment of rosacea with intense pulsed light: significant improvement and long-lasting results. Br J Dermatol. 2008;159(3):628–632.
  39. Schroeter CA, Haaf-von Below S, Neumann HA. Effective treatment of rosacea using intense pulsed light systems. Dermatol Surg. 2005;31(10):1285-1289. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4725.2005.31204
  40. Borges JS, Vergés C, Lima J, March de Ribot F. (2021). Intense Pulsed Light (IPL) from Dermatology to Ophthalmology. Journal of Dermatology and Skin Science, 2021;3(3):1–3. doi.org/10.29245/2767-5092/2021/3.1139
  41. Barbosa Ribeiro B, Marta A, Ponces Ramalhão J, Marques JH, Barbosa I. Pulsed Light Therapy in the Management of Dry Eye Disease: Current Perspectives. Clin Ophthalmol. 2022;16:3883-3893. Published 2022 Nov 24. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S349596
  42. Martínez-Hergueta MC, Alió Del Barrio JL, Canto-Cerdan M, Amesty MA. Efficacy and safety of intense pulsed light direct eyelid application. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):15592. Published 2022 Sep 16. doi:10.1038/s41598-022-17986-3
  43. Austin E, Geisler AN, Nguyen J, et al. Visible light. Part I: Properties and cutaneous effects of visible light. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;84(5):1219-1231. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2021.02.048
  44. Maruyama S. Hand rejuvenation using standard intense pulsed light (IPL) in Asian patients. Laser Ther. 2016;25(1):43-54. doi:10.5978/islsm.16-OR-04
  45. Photobiomodulation. ASLMS American Society for Laser Medicine & Surgery, Inc. https://www.aslms.org/for-the-public/treatments-using-lasers-and-energy-based-devices/photobiomodulationAccessed June 26, 2022.
  46. Smith K. The photobiological basis of low level laser radiation therapy. Laser Ther. 1991;3:19–24.
  47. Karu T. Primary and secondary mechanisms of action of visible to near-IR radiation on cells. J Photochem Photobiol B. 1999;49(1):1-17. doi:10.1016/S1011-1344(98)00219-X
  48. Farivar S, Malekshahabi T, Shiari R. Biological effects of low level laser therapy. J Lasers Med Sci. 2014;5(2):58–62.
  49. Ahmad M, Wolberg A, Kahwaji CI. Biochemistry, electron transport chain. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2022.
  50. Dunn J, Grider MH. Physiology, adenosine triphosphate. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2022.
  51. Pinto MC, Kihara AH, Goulart VA, et al. Calcium signaling and cell proliferation. Cell Signal. 2015;27(11):2139-2149. doi:10.1016/j.cellsig.2015.08.006
  52. Moe AM, Golding AE, Bement WM. Cell healing: Calcium, repair and regeneration. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2015;45:18-23. doi:10.1016/j.semcdb.2015.09.026
  53. Tonelli FM, Santos AK, Gomes DA, et al. Stem cells and calcium signaling. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2012;740:891-916. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-2888-2_40
  54. Takezaki S, Omi T, Sato S, et al. Ultrastructural observations of human skin following irradiation with visible red light-emitting diodes (LEDs): a preliminary in vivo report. Laser Ther. 2005;14(4): 153–160.
  55. Takezaki S, Omi T, Sato S, Kawana S. Light-emitting diode phototherapy at 630 +/- 3 nm increases local levels of skin-homing T-cells in human subjects. J Nippon Med Sch. 2006;73(2):75-81. doi:10.1272/jnms.73.75
  56. Young S, Bolton P, Dyson M, et al. Macrophage responsiveness to light therapy. Lasers Surg Med.1989;9(5):497-505. doi:10.1002/lsm.1900090513
  57. Dick MK, Miao JH, Limaiem F. Histology, fibroblast. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2022.
  58. Werner S, Krieg T, Smola H. Keratinocyte-fibroblast interactions in wound healing. J Invest Dermatol. 2007;127(5):998-1008. doi:10.1038/sj.jid.5700786
  59. Sauls RS, McCausland C, Taylor BN. Histology, t-cell lymphocyte. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2022.
  60. Espinoza VE, Emmady PD. Histology, monocytes. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2022.
  61. Geneva I. Photobiomodulation for the treatment of retinal diseases: a review. Int J Ophthal. 2016;9:145–152.
  62. Poyton RO, Ball KA. Therapeutic photobiomodulation: nitric oxide and a novel function of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase. Discov Med. 2011;11(57):154-159.
  63. Liu R, Rong B, Tu P, et al. Analysis of cytokine levels in tears and clinical correlations after intense pulsed light treating meibomian gland dysfunction. Am J Ophthalmol. 2017;183:81-90.
  64. Byun JY, Choi HY, Myung KB, et al. Expression of IL-10, TGF-beta(1) and TNF-alpha in cultured keratinocytes (HaCaT cells) after IPL treatment or ALA-IPL photodynamic treatment. Ann Dermatol. 2009;21(1):12-17. doi:10.5021/ad.2009.21.1.12
  65. Lee SY, Park KH, Choi JW, et al. A prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, and split-face clinical study on LED phototherapy for skin rejuvenation: clinical, profilometric, histologic, ultrastructural, and biochemical evaluations and comparison of three different treatment settings. J Photochem Photobiol B. 2007;88(1):51-67. doi:10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2007.04.008
  66. Huang J, Luo X, Lu J, et al. IPL irradiation rejuvenates skin collagen via the bidirectional regulation of MMP-1 and TGF-β1 mediated by MAPKs in fibroblasts. Lasers Med Sci. 2011;26(3):381-387. doi:10.1007/s10103-010-0870-1
  67. De Paiva CS, Volpe EA, Gandhi NB, et al. Disruption of TGF-β signaling improves ocular surface epithelial disease in experimental autoimmune keratoconjunctivitis sicca. PLoS One. 2011;6(12):e29017. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0029017
  68. Taylor M, Porter R, Gonzalez M. Intense pulsed light may improve inflammatory acne through TNF-α down-regulation. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2014;16(2):96-103. doi:10.3109/14764172.2013.864198
  69. Wong WR, Shyu WL, Tsai JW, et al. Intense pulsed light modulates the expressions of MMP-2, MMP-14 and TIMP-2 in skin dermal fibroblasts cultured within contracted collagen lattices. J Dermatol Sci. 2008;51(1):70-73. doi:10.1016/j.jdermsci.2008.02.011
  70. Lee H, Han YE, Park SY, et al. Changes in the expression of matrix metalloproteinase-9 after intense pulsed light therapy combined with meibomian gland expression in moderate and severe meibomian gland dysfunction. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2021;44(3):101339. doi:10.1016/j.clae.2020.05.008
  71. Li DQ, Shang TY, Kim HS, et al. Regulated expression of collagenases MMP-1, -8, and -13 and stromelysins MMP-3, -10, and -11 by human corneal epithelial cells. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44(7):2928-2936. doi:10.1167/iovs.02-0874
  72. Lubart R, Lavi R, Friedmann H, et al. Photochemistry and photobiology of light absorption by living cells. Photomed Laser Surg. 2006;24(2):179-185. doi:10.1089/pho.2006.24.179
  73. Huang YY, Chen AC, Carroll JD, et al. Biphasic dose response in low level light therapy. Dose Response. 2009;7(4):358-383. doi:10.2203/dose-response.09-027.Hamblin
  74. Augustin AJ, Spitznas M, Kaviani N, et al. Oxidative reactions in the tear fluid of patients suffering from dry eyes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1995;233(11):694-698. doi:10.1007/BF00164671
  75. Vegunta S, Patel D, Shen JF. Combination therapy of intense pulsed light therapy and meibomian gland expression (IPL/MGX) can improve dry eye symptoms and meibomian gland function in patients with refractory dry eye: a retrospective analysis. Cornea. 2016;35(3):318-322. doi:10.1097/ICO.0000000000000735
  76. Vora GK, Gupta PK. Intense pulsed light therapy for the treatment of evaporative dry eye disease. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2015;26:314–318.
  77. Yin Y, Liu N, Gong L, et al. Changes in the meibomian gland after exposure to intense pulsed light in meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) patients. Curr Eye Res. 2018;43(3):308-313. doi:10.1080/02713683.2017.1406525
  78. Albietz JM, Schmid KL. Intense pulsed light treatment and meibomian gland expression for moderate to advanced meibomian gland dysfunction. Clin Exp Optom. 2018;101(1):23-33. doi:10.1111/cxo.12541
  79. Lumenis receives FDA approval for its IPL device to manage dry eye disease and launches OptiLight™. Lumenis. https://lumenis.com/medical/specialties/eye-care/resource-hub/lumenis-receives-fda-approval-for-its-ipl-device-to-manage-dry-eye-disease-and-launches-optilight/. Published April 29, 2021. Accessed June 26, 2022.
  80. Kassir R, Kolluru A, Kassir M. Intense pulsed light for the treatment of rosacea and telangiectasias. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2011;13(5):216-22.
  81. Yan X, Hong J, Jin X, et al. The efficacy of intense pulsed light combined with meibomian gland expression for the treatment of dry eye disease due to meibomian gland dysfunction: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Eye Contact Lens. 2021;47(1):45-53. doi:10.1097/ICL.0000000000000711
  82. Arita R, Fukuoka S, Morishige N. Therapeutic efficacy of intense pulsed light in patients with refractory meibomian gland dysfunction. Ocul Surf. 2019;17(1):104-110. doi:10.1016/j.jtos.2018.11.004
  83. Gao YF, Liu RJ, Li YX, et al. Comparison of anti-inflammatory effects of intense pulsed light with tobramycin/dexamethasone plus warm compress on dry eye associated meibomian gland dysfunction. Int J Ophthalmol. 2019;12(11):1708-1713. doi:10.18240/ijo.2019.11.07
  84. Fishman HA, Periman LM, Shah AA. Real-time video microscopy of in vitro demodex death by intense pulsed light. Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg. 2020;38(8):472-476.
  85. Prieto VG, Sadick NS, Lloreta J, et al. Effects of intense pulsed light on sun-damaged human skin, routine, and ultrastructural analysis. Lasers Surg Med. 2002;30(2):82-5
  86. Dell SJ, Gaster RN, Barbarino SC, et al. Prospective evaluation of intense pulsed light and meibomian gland expression efficacy on relieving signs and symptoms of dry eye disease due to meibomian gland dysfunction. Clin Ophthalmol. 2017;11:817-827. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S130706
  87. Craig JP, Chen YH, Turnbull PR. Prospective trial of intense pulsed light for the treatment of meibomian gland dysfunction. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015;56(3):1965-1970. doi:10.1167/iovs.14-15764
  88. Bäumler W, Vural E, Landthaler M, et al. The effects of intense pulsed light (IPL) on blood vessels investigated by mathematical modeling. Lasers Surg Med. 2007;39(2):132-139. doi:10.1002/lsm.20408
  89. Suwal A, Hao JL, Zhou DD, et al. Use of intense pulsed light to mitigate meibomian gland dysfunction for dry eye disease. Int J Med Sci. 2020;17(10):1385-1392. doi:10.7150/ijms.44288
  90. Borchman D, Foulks GN, Yappert MC, et al. Human meibum lipid conformation and thermodynamic changes with meibomian-gland dysfunction. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52(6):3805-3817. doi:10.1167/iovs.10-6514
  91. Butovich IA. Meibomian glands, meibum, and meibogenesis. Exp Eye Res. 2017;163:2-16. doi:10.1016/j.exer.2017.06.020
  92. Millar TJ, Mudgil P, Khanal S. Meibomian Glands and Lipid Layer. In: Encyclopedia of the Eye. Volume 3. Dartt D.A., Besharse J., Dana R., editors. San Diego, CA: Elsevier; 2010: 13-20 (Chapter 48).
  93. Knop E, Knop N, Millar T, et al. The international workshop on meibomian gland dysfunction: report of the subcommittee on anatomy, physiology, and pathophysiology of the meibomian gland. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52(4):1938-1978. doi:10.1167/iovs.10-6997c
  94. Seal D, Ficker L, Ramakrishnan M, Wright P. Role of staphylococcal toxin production in blepharitis. Ophthalmology. 1990;97(12):1684-1688. doi:10.1016/s0161-6420(90)32361-8
  95. Putnam CM. Diagnosis and management of blepharitis: an optometrist's perspective. Clin Optom (Auckl). 2016;8:71-78. doi:10.2147/OPTO.S84795
  96. Eberhardt M, Rammohan G. Blepharitis. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2022.
  97. Gutierrez Y. Diagnostic Pathology of Parasitic Infections with Clinical Correlations, 2nd ed. New York. NY: Oxford University Press. 2000.
  98. Liu J, Sheha H, Tseng SC. Pathogenic role of Demodex mites in blepharitis. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. 2010;10(5):505-510. doi:10.1097/ACI.0b013e32833df9f4
  99. Luo X, Li J, Chen C, et al. Ocular demodicosis as a potential cause of ocular surface Inflammation. Cornea. 2017;36 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S9-S14. doi:10.1097/ICO.0000000000001361
  100. Cheng AM, Sheha H, Tseng SC. Recent advances on ocular Demodex infestation. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2015;26(4):295-300. doi:10.1097/ICU.0000000000000168
  101. Li J, O'Reilly N, Sheha H, et al. Correlation between ocular Demodex infestation and serum immunoreactivity to Bacillus proteins in patients with facial rosacea. Ophthalmology. 2010;117(5):870-877.e1. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.09.057
  102. Bevins CL, Liu FT. Rosacea: skin innate immunity gone awry? Nat Med. 2007;13(8):904-906. doi:10.1038/nm0807-904
  103. Lacey N, Delaney S, Kavanagh K, et al. Mite-related bacterial antigens stimulate inflammatory cells in rosacea. Br J Dermatol. 2007;157(3):474-481. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2007.08028.x
  104. O'Reilly N, Menezes N, Kavanagh K. Positive correlation between serum immunoreactivity to Demodex-associated Bacillus proteins and erythematotelangiectatic rosacea. Br J Dermatol. 2012;167(5):1032-1036. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2012.11114.x
  105. Rong B, Tang Y, Tu P, et al. Intense Pulsed Light Applied Directly on Eyelids Combined with Meibomian Gland Expression to Treat Meibomian Gland Dysfunction. Photomed Laser Surg. 2018;36(6):326-332. doi:10.1089/pho.2017.4402
  106. Lauer M, Barker JP, Solano M, Dubin J. FDA Device Regulation. Mo Med. 2017;114(4):283-288.
  107. FDA approval vs FDA clearance in cosmetic surgery. American Board of Cosmetic Surgery. ABCS. August 22, 2024. Accessed February 17, 2025. https://www.americanboardcosmeticsurgery.org/making-safe-choices/fda-approval-vs-fda-clearance-cosmetic-surgery/.
  108. Van Norman GA. Off-Label Use vs Off-Label Marketing: Part 2: Off-Label Marketing-Consequences for Patients, Clinicians, and Researchers. JACC Basic Transl Sci. 2023;8(3):359-370. Published 2023 Mar 27. doi:10.1016/j.jacbts.2022.12.012
  109. Thaysen-Petersen D, Erlendsson AM, Nash JF, et al. Side effects from intense pulsed light: Importance of skin pigmentation, fluence level and ultraviolet radiation-A randomized controlled trial. Lasers Surg Med. 2017;49(1):88-96. doi:10.1002/lsm.22566
  110. Fitzpatrick TB. The validity and practicality of sun-reactive skin types I through VI. Arch Dermatol. 1988;124(6):869-871. doi:10.1001/archderm.124.6.869
  111. Fitzpatrick T. Soleil et peau. J Med Esthet. 1975;2:33-34.
  112. Gupta V, Sharma VK. Skin typing: Fitzpatrick grading and others. Clin Dermatol. 2019;37(5):430-436. doi:10.1016/j.clindermatol.2019.07.010
  113. Giannaccari G, Taroni L, Senni C, et al. Intense pulsed light therapy in the treatment of meibomian gland dysfunction: current perspectives. Clin Optom (Auckl). 2019;11:113-126. doi:10.2147/OPTO.S217639
  114. Casey AS, Goldberg D. Guidelines for laser hair removal. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2008;10(1):24-33. doi:10.1080/14764170701817049
  115. Drosner M, Adatto M; European Society for Laser Dermatology. Photo-epilation: guidelines for care from the European Society for Laser Dermatology (ESLD). J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2005;7(1):33-38. doi:10.1080/14764170410003002
  116. Gold MH, Foster A, Biron JA. Low-energy intense pulsed light for hair removal at home. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2010;3(2):48-53.
  117. Ding J, Kam WR, Dieckow J, et al. The influence of 13-cis retinoic acid on human meibomian gland epithelial cells. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(6):4341-4350. doi:10.1167/iovs.13-11863
  118. Ding J, Sullivan DA. Aging and dry eye disease. Exp Gerontol. 2012;47(7):483-490. doi:10.1016/j.exger.2012.03.020
  119. OptiLight - A Bright Solution for Dry Eyes. Lumenis. https://lumenis.com/vision/products/optilight/. Accessed June 26, 2022.
  120. Fang L, Gold MH, Huang L. Melasma-like hyperpigmentation induced by intense pulsed light treatment in Chinese individuals. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2014;16(6):296-302. doi:10.3109/14764172.2014.953417
  121. Li YH, Chen JZ, Wei HC, et al. Efficacy and safety of intense pulsed light in treatment of melasma in Chinese patients. Dermatol Surg. 2008;34(5):693-701. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4725.2008.34130.x
  122. Levy JL. Intense pulsed light treatment for chronic facial erythema of systemic lupus erythematosus: a case report. J Cutan Laser Ther. 2000;2(4):195-198. doi:10.1080/146288300750163772
  123. Creadore A, Watchmaker J, Maymone MBC, et al. Cosmetic treatment in patients with autoimmune connective tissue diseases: Best practices for patients with lupus erythematosus. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;83(2):343-363. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2020.03.123
  124. Schilling LM, Halvorson CR, Weiss RA, et al. Safety of combination laser or Intense Pulsed Light Therapies and doxycycline for the treatment of rosacea. Dermatol Surg. 2019;45(11):1401-1405. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000002009
  125. Han JY, Park SY, Sunwoo JH, Kim JY, Tchah H, Lee H. Safety and efficacy of a low-level radiofrequency thermal treatment in an animal model of obstructive meibomian gland dysfunction. Lasers Med Sci. 2022;37(7):2907-2915. doi:10.1007/s10103-022-03559-3
  126. Ferrari G, Colucci A, Barbariga M, Ruggeri A, Rama P. High Frequency Electrotherapy for the Treatment of Meibomian Gland Dysfunction. Cornea. 2019;38(11):1424-1429. doi:10.1097/ICO.0000000000002063
  127. Chelnis J, Garcia CN, Hamza H. Multi-Frequency RF Combined with Intense Pulsed Light Improves Signs and Symptoms of Dry Eye Disease Due to Meibomian Gland Dysfunction. Clin Ophthalmol. 2023;17:3089-3102. Published 2023 Oct 20. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S426564
  128. Javate RM, Cruz RT Jr, Khan J, Trakos N, Gordon RE. Nonablative 4-MHz dual radiofrequency wand rejuvenation treatment for periorbital rhytides and midface laxity. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 May-Jun;27(3):180-5. doi: 10.1097/IOP.0b013e3181fe8e5a.
  129. Rabkin JM, Hunt TK. Local heat increases blood flow and oxygen tension in wounds. Arch Surg. 1987 Feb;122(2):221-5. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1987.01400140103014.
  130. Al-Atif H. Collagen Supplements for Aging and Wrinkles: A Paradigm Shift in the Fields of Dermatology and Cosmetics. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2022 Jan 1;12(1):e2022018. doi: 10.5826/dpc.1201a18.
  131. el-Domyati M, el-Ammawi TS, Medhat W, et al. Radiofrequency facial rejuvenation: evidence-based effect. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011;64(3):524-535. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2010.06.045
  132. Shin JM, Kim JE. Radiofrequency in Clinical Dermatology. Med Lasers. 2013;2(2):49-57. doi:https://doi.org/10.25289/ML.2013.2.2.49
  133. Green JB, Dover JS, Kaminer MS. Tolerability of a monopolar radiofrequency facial skin tightening procedure: An observational study. Cosmetic Dermatology. 2011;24(7):327-330.
  134. Paul S, Cohen A, Parsa K, et al. Transcutaneous Radiofrequency-mediated Meibomian Gland . The Open Ophthalmology Journal. 2023;17. DOI: 10.2174/18743641-v17-e230328-2022-63.
  135. Jaccoma EH, Litherland C, Jaccomo A, Ahmed A. Pellevé™ vs Lipiflow™ MGD-Related Dry Eye Treatment Study: The ThermaLid™ Procedure. J Dry Eye Ocu Surf Dis 2018;1(1):e11-e21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22374/jded.v1i1.2.
  136. Maskin SL, Testa WR. Growth of meibomian gland tissue after intraductal meibomian gland probing in patients with obstructive meibomian gland dysfunction. Br J Ophthalmol. 2018;102(1):59-68. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2016-310097
  137. Maskin SL, Alluri S. Intraductal meibomian gland probing: background, patient selection, procedure, and perspectives [published correction appears in Clin Ophthalmol. 2019 Aug 05;13:1475. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S224474.]. Clin Ophthalmol. 2019;13:1203-1223. Published 2019 Jul 10. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S183174
  138. Maskin SL, Toland C. Meibomian Gland Probing Stimulates a Proliferative Epithelial Response Resulting in Duct Regeneration. Clin Ophthalmol. 2024;18:631-645. Published 2024 Mar 1. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S452549
  139. Korb DR, Blackie CA. Restoration of meibomian gland functionality with novel thermodynamic treatment device-a case report. Cornea. 2010;29(8):930-933. doi:10.1097/ICO.0b013e3181ca36d6
  140. OptiPLUS: Radio Frequency Facial Device. Lumenis. May 22, 2025. Accessed June 10, 2025. https://lumenis.com/vision/products/optiplus/.
  141. Paul M, Blugerman G, Kreindel M, Mulholland RS. Three-dimensional radiofrequency tissue tightening: a proposed mechanism and applications for body contouring. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2011;35(1):87-95. doi:10.1007/s00266-010-9564-0
  142. Yamamoto Y, Obayashi K, Okano Y, Satoh Y, Masaki H, Funasaka Y. Efficacy of thermal stimulation on wrinkle removal via the enhancement of collagen synthesis. J. Dermatol. Sci. Suppl. 2006;2:S39–S49. doi: 10.1016/j.descs.2006.08.006
  143. Koo J, Chae Y, Kim SE, et al. Evaluation of Non-invasive Fat Reduction Using a Resistive Electric Transfer-based Radiofrequency Device With Multi-channel Handpieces. In Vivo. 2024;38(4):1750-1757. doi:10.21873/invivo.13625
  144. Jiang J, Borowiak K, Tudge L, Otto C, von Kriegstein K. Neural mechanisms of eye contact when listening to another person talking. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2017;12(2):319-328. doi:10.1093/scan/nsw127
  145. Gill D. Women and men integrate facial information differently in appraising the beauty of a face. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2017; 38(6):756-760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2017.07.001.
  146. Guo OD LW, Akpek E. The negative effects of dry eye disease on quality of life and visual function. Turk J Med Sci. 2020;50(SI-2):1611-1615. Published 2020 Nov 3. doi:10.3906/sag-2002-143
  147. Singh P, Birkett L, Dhar S, Krumhuber E, Mosahebi A, Ponniah A. Facial Beauty and the Correlation of Associated Attributes: An Empirical Aesthetic Database Study. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2024;12(1):e5382. Published 2024 Jan 10. doi:10.1097/GOX.0000000000005382
  148. Foo YZ, Simmons LW, Rhodes G. Predictors of facial attractiveness and health in humans. Sci Rep. 2017;7:39731. Published 2017 Feb 3. doi:10.1038/srep39731
  149. Little AC, Jones BC, DeBruine LM. Facial attractiveness: evolutionary based research. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2011;366(1571):1638-1659. doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0404
  150. Jones BC, Little AC, Penton-Voak IS, Tiddeman BP, Burt DM, Perrett DI. 2001. Facial symmetry and judgements of apparent health: support for a ‘good genes’ explanation of the attractiveness–symmetry relationship. Evol. Hum. Behav. 2001;22(6): 417–429. doi:10.1016/S1090-5138(01)00083-6
  151. Rhodes G, Yoshikawa S, Palermo R, et al. Perceived health contributes to the attractiveness of facial symmetry, averageness, and sexual dimorphism. Perception. 2007;36(8):1244-1252. doi:10.1068/p5712
  152. Linton RG, Curnow DH, Riley WJ. The meibomian glands: an investigation into the secretion and some aspects of the physiology. Br J Ophthalmol. 1961;45(11):718-723. doi:10.1136/bjo.45.11.718
  153. Epstein AB. Diagnosing Dry Eye: What We’re Actually Looking to Identify. Optometricmanagement.com. https://www.optometricmanagement.com/supplements/2019/june-2019/the-effective-and-practical-dry-eye-practice/diagnosing-dry-eye-what-we-8217;re-actually-look. Published June 1, 2019. Accessed June 26, 2022.
  154. Pult H, Korb DR, Murphy PJ, et al. A new model of central lid margin apposition and tear film mixing in spontaneous blinking. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2015;38(3):173-180. doi:10.1016/j.clae.2015.01.012
  155. Showalter JK. Think about the blink: Part 1. Optometry Times. https://www.optometrytimes.com/view/think-about-the-blink-part-1. Published November 11, 2020. Accessed June 26, 2022.
  156. Chhadva P, McClellan AL, Alabiad CR, Feuer WJ, Batawi H, Galor A. Impact of Eyelid Laxity on Symptoms and Signs of Dry Eye Disease. Cornea. 2016;35(4):531-535. doi:10.1097/ICO.0000000000000786
  157. de Paiva CS. Effects of Aging in Dry Eye. Int Ophthalmol Clin. 2017;57(2):47-64. doi:10.1097/IIO.0000000000000170
  158. Cuerda-Galindo E, Díaz-Gil G, Palomar-Gallego MA, Linares-GarcíaValdecasas R. Increased fibroblast proliferation and activity after applying intense pulsed light 800-1200 nm. Ann Anat. 2015;198:66-72. doi:10.1016/j.aanat.2014.11.005
  159. Goldberg DJ. Current trends in intense pulsed light. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2012;5(6):45-53.
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
Edward H. Jaccoma, MD
About Edward H. Jaccoma, MD

Dr. Edward H. Jaccoma is a Board Certified Ophthalmologist who has recently returned to New Hampshire after practicing in the Southern Maine area for 30 years. He specializes in General Ophthalmology, the medical and surgical management of dry eye-related disorders, as well as plastic surgeries of the eye and eyelid areas. Dr. Jaccoma received his Medical Degree from the University of Vermont where he graduated with a nomination to the Alpha Omega Alpha Honorary Society and his Bachelor of Science degree from Fairfield University. He completed his internship in Internal Medicine at the Washington Hospital Center and his residency in Ophthalmology at the University of Virginia. He has also taught medical students and resident physicians at the University of New England College of Medicine, as well as serving as Medical Director of Medispas, delivering laser, injections, IPL, radiofrequency, and surgical aesthetic care. Additionally, Dr. Jaccoma will perform cosmetic eyelid procedures and will offer treatments for reducing the appearance of wrinkles and rejuvenating the skin. Dr. Jaccoma is a member of the American Academy of Ophthalmology and a Fellow of the American Medical Association.

Edward H. Jaccoma, MD