scholarly journals Comparison of Transcanalicular Multidiode Laser Dacryocystorhinostomy with and without Silicon Tube Intubation

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yildiray Yildirim ◽  
Taner Kar ◽  
Tuncay Topal ◽  
Enver Cesmeci ◽  
Abdullah Kaya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diode Laser ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Duct Obstruction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Silicon Tube ◽  
Silicone Tube Intubation ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Aim. To compare the surgical outcomes of surgery with and without bicanalicular silicon tube intubation for the treatment of patients who have primary uncomplicated nasolacrimal duct obstruction.Methods. This retrospective study is comprised of 113 patients with uncomplicated primary nasolacrimal duct obstruction. There were 2 groups in the study: Group 1 (n=58) patients underwent transcanalicular diode laser dacryocystorhinostomy surgery with bicanalicular silicon tube intubation and Group 2 (n=55) patients underwent transcanalicular diode laser dacryocystorhinostomy surgery without bicanalicular silicon tube intubation. The follow-up period was18.42±2.8months for Group 1 and18.8±2.1months for Group 2.Results. Success was defined by irrigation of the lacrimal system without regurgitation and by the absence of epiphora. Success rates were 84.4% for Group 1 and 63.6% for Group 2 (P=0.011). Statistically a significant difference was found between the two groups.Conclusion. The results of the study showed that transcanalicular diode laser dacryocystorhinostomy surgery with bicanalicular silicon tube intubation was more successful than the other method of surgery. Consequently, the application of silicone tube intubation in transcanalicular diode laser dacryocystorhinostomy surgery is recommended.

scholarly journals Probing without Irrigation in Children with Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction

2013 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gloria Isaza ◽  
Sourabh Arora
Keyword(s):  
Success Rate ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction ◽  
Purulent Discharge ◽  
Complete Disappearance ◽  
Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction ◽  
Duct Obstruction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the results of probing, without fluorescein irrigation, as a primary treatment for epiphora and/or mucous discharge, secondary to congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (CNLDO) Methods: The medical records of nine-two children (127 eyes) with CNLDO who underwent a single probing without the use of fluorescein irrigation between January 2006 and December 2011 were reviewed retrospectively. Inclusion criteria were no prior nasolacrimal surgical procedure, history of epiphora and/or discharge since birth or shortly after birth in one or both eyes and at least one of the following clinical signs: epiphora, muco-purulent discharge and increased tear meniscus height. Children were investigated in two sub-groups based on age at time of probing; group 1 (51 eyes/40 children) included children who underwent probing at age ≤ 2 years and group 2 (76 eyes/52 children) included children who underwent probing at age > 2years. The primary outcome was the complete disappearance of symptoms and signs in the affected eye(s), assessed at 3 months after surgery. Results: The success rate for the overall sample was 83.5 % (106/127 eyes), in group 1 was 90.2% (46/51) and in group 2 was 78.9% (60/76). There was no significant difference in success rate between groups (p=0.094). Gender (p=0.292), affected eye (p=0.647) and bilateral cases (p=0.739) were not associated with successful elimination of symptoms. Conclusion: Probing without fluorescein irrigation for CNLDO beyond 1 year of age is highly successful and comparable to the published efficacy rates of the traditional probing with fluorescein irrigation.

Epiphora in patients after high-dose radioiodine therapy

2021 ◽  
pp. 54-55
Author(s):  
V.D. Yartsev ◽  
◽  
E.L. Atkova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Radioiodine Therapy ◽  
Therapy Group ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct ◽  
Positive Answer ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Duct Obstruction ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Purpose. To estimate the frequency of tearing in patients after high-dose radioiodine therapy. Materials and Methods. The survey was conducted in 500 patients after radioiodine therapy (group 1) and 654 volunteers (group 2). We asked whether the respondent noticed epiphora last month, in case of a positive answer we specified how many times during the day it was necessary to wipe the tear, comparing the result with Munk scale. Results. The patients of group 1 noticed tearing in 232 cases, the respondents of group 2 noticed it in 186 cases. Epiphora was more frequent in patients of group 1 (46 % of cases), rather than in volunteers of group 2 (27 % of cases). Excessive tearing was noticed in 8.8 % of patients of group 1 and 3.5 % of respondents of group 2. The difference was statistically significant. Conclusion. 8.8 % of patients complain about excessive tearing after high-dose radioiodine therapy, which is more frequent than in the general population. This may be related to secondary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Key words: epiphora, nasolacrimal duct obstruction, radioiodine therapy.

scholarly journals Outcomes of external dacryocystorhinostomy and endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy in the management of nasolacrimal duct obstruction

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
S Duwal ◽  
R Saiju
Keyword(s):  
Success Rate ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction ◽  
Endoscopic Endonasal ◽  
Duct Obstruction ◽  
Dence Interval ◽  
External Dacryocystorhinostomy ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
External Dcr ◽  
Group 1

Introduction: Dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) is the treatment of choice for nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Although external DCR is regarded as the gold standard, endoscopic DCR is evolving as an equally-effective alternative. Objectives To compare the success rate of treating nasolacrimal duct obstruction by endoscopic endonasal method compared to the conventional DCR surgery.Materials and methods This prospective, comparative, non-randomised study was conducted in 2009 - 2010. Thirty consecutive patients undergoing endoscopic endonasal DCR (Group 1) and 30 consecutive patients undergoing external DCR (Group 2) between July 2009 and September 2010 at the oculoplasty unit of the Tilganga institute of ophthalmology were included in this study. A patent lacrimal passage on syringing and symptomatic improvement at six months after surgery was de¿ned as a successful outcome. The intraoperative and postoperative complications were also compared. Results Our study included 31 eyes of 30 patients in Group 1 and 34 eyes of 30 patients in Group 2. The success rate for endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy was 90.3 % (95 % con¿dence interval 80 - 100) and external dacryocystorhinostomy was 94.1 % (95 % con¿dence interval 80 - 100). The difference of surgical success among the two methods was not statistically significant (p = 0.7). The rate of intra-operative and post-operative complications was similar in the two methods (p = 0.5). Conclusion: The short term outcomes and complication rates of endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy and external dacryocystorhinostomy were similar.

scholarly journals Role of silicone stenting in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 248
Author(s):  
Abdussalam M. Jahan ◽  
Yousef M. Eldanfur ◽  
Abdulhakim B. Ghuzi
Keyword(s):  
Success Rate ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction ◽  
P Value ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Duct Obstruction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Silicone Stent ◽  
Endoscopic Dcr

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) is a surgical procedure performed to relief nasolacrimal duct obstruction, which involves the creation of ostium at the lacrimal bone to form a shunt in the nasolacrimal pathway. Closure of the rhinostomy opening was considered a major factor for surgical failure. Use of silicone stent in endoscopic DCR to improve the success rate of the operation have been tried by many surgeons. In this study we assess the success rates of endoscopic DCR with and without silicone stents.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> Prospective study includes 30 patients were operated in the Department of ENT, Misrata Medical Center, from April 2017 to March 2018. They underwent endonasal endoscopic DCR for primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction.<strong> </strong>These patients were randomly divided in two groups: A and B with 15 patients in each group. The group A patients underwent endoscopic DCR with silicone stent and group B patients underwent endoscopic DCR without stent. The results were statistically analyzed by chi-square test.  </p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> 30 patients were included in this study, their age ranged from 17 to 60 years, complaining of epiphora, 24 (80%) were females and 6 (20%) were males. The success rate was higher in patients with silicone stent (93.33%) as compared to patients without silicone stent (86.67%) but this difference in the results is not statistically significant (As p value is 0.542 which is &gt;0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> Endoscopic DCR is safe, successful procedure for treatment of nasolacrimal duct obstruction and there was no significant difference in the success rates of performing endonasal DCR with silicone or without silicone stents.</p>

scholarly journals Effect of Age on Primary Balloon Dacryocystoplasty and Probing Success in Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Volkan Dericioğlu ◽  
Mehmet Orkun Sevik ◽  
Sena Sümmen Saçu ◽  
Muhsin Eraslan ◽  
Eren Cerman
Keyword(s):  
Success Rate ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction ◽  
Duct Obstruction ◽  
Group 3 ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Effect Of Age ◽  
Group 1

Abstract Purpose: To compare the success rates of balloon dacryocystoplasty (BDP) and probing as a primary procedure in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (CNLDO) and investigate the effect of age on both procedures.Methods: A total of 135 patients (171 eyes) with simple or incomplete complex CNLDO were included in this retrospective study; complete complex CNLDO cases were excluded. The success rates for primary BDP (118 eyes) and for probing (53 eyes) were compared as overall and among the age groups; Group 1 (12–24 months old), Group 2 (25–36 months old), and Group 3 (> 36 months old).Results: Mean age of the patients was 41.5±27.2 months for primary BDP, and 21.8±10.8 months for probing (p<0.001). Overall success rates for primary BDP and probing were 81.1% (43/53) and 76.3% (90/118), respectively (p=0.481). Success rates for BDP and probing among age groups were, 93.8% and 85.3% in Group 1 (p=0.306), 93.3% and 50.0% in Group 2 (p=0.012), and 63.6% and 27.3% in Group 3 (p=0.052), respectively. Cox regression analysis showed that the median ages were 18 months for probing and 36 months for primary BDP. Poisson regression model showed that, for every one-month increase in patients’ age, the success rate of probing decreased by 9.7%.Conclusion: Probing success decreased to a point where different treatment options such as primary BDP can be discussed with the patient’s parents after 18 months of age. The success of BDP decreased after 36 months, while it maintained a high success rate between 24-36 months as primary treatment.

scholarly journals Comparative study of stenting and ostium packing in Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy for Primary Acquired Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joyce Chin ◽  
Vincent Lam ◽  
Regine Chan ◽  
C. L. Li ◽  
Luke Yeung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nasolacrimal Duct ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction ◽  
Gelatin Sponge ◽  
Duct Obstruction ◽  
Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy ◽  
Group 4 ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Group 3 ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

AbstractIn this retrospective study, we compared the efficacy and safety of mechanical adjuvants in mucosal-sparing, mechanical endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (MMED) for primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction (PANDO). 116 adult patients (90 female) aged 61 ± 11 received one of the following after MMED without topical mitomycin: no stenting or packing (group 1, n = 25), 1-week ostium packing by ribbon gauze (group 2, n = 29) or non-medicated absorbable gelatin sponge (group 3, n = 25), 8-week bicanalicular stenting (group 4, n = 28). 104 patients(92%) provided 12-month outcomes. Number of patients, age, gender, surgeon, and osteotomy size were comparable among groups (p = 0.4–0.9). Marginal significance was found in anatomical (group 1:80%, group 2:96.6%, group 3:96%, group 4:96.4%, p = 0.05) but not functional success (group 1:85%, group 2:85.7%, group 3:83.3%, group 4:88.9%, p = 0.75) at postoperative 12-month. Patients receiving any packing or stenting achieved better anatomical (96% versus 80%, p = 0.015) but not functional success (85% versus 86%, p = 0.90) compared to those receiving none. More patients receiving stenting developed postoperative granuloma than those who did not (87% versus 63%, p = 0.04). 1-week ostium packing was found to be as effective as 8-week bicanalicular intubation in improving anatomical outcome after MMED for PANDO. Functional outcome, however, did not differ among patients receiving mechanical adjuvant or not.

scholarly journals Non endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy versus external dacryocystorhinostomy

1970 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 437-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
BR Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Direct Method ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction ◽  
Successful Outcome ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Endoscopic Endonasal ◽  
Duct Obstruction ◽  
Surgical Success ◽  
External Dacryocystorhinostomy

Aims and Objectives: To compare the success rates of non endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy and conventional external dacryocystorhinostomy for the surgical management of primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Materials and methods: A retrospective, nonrandomized, comparative interventional case series of 302 patients who underwent either endonasal or external dacryocystorhinostomy over a period of 2 years. All surgeries were performed by a single surgeon and patients with primary nasolacrimal duct obstruction with a minimum of 6 months post operative follow up were included in the study. While external dacryocystorhinostomy was performed using traditional technique, endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy was performed using direct method of nonendoscopic visualization. Results: Of the 302 cases included in the study 165 patients had endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy whereas 137 underwent external dacryocystorhinostomy. Success was defined by resolution of symptoms of tearing, a negative fluorescein dye disappearance test and patency of the canalicular system on lacrimal irrigation. In the external dacryocystorhinostomy group 124 (90.5%) patients had surgical success whereas 146 (88.5%) of the endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy patients had successful outcome. The overall success rate was 89.4%, and the difference of surgical success between the two groups was not statistically significant ( P=0.57). Conclusion: Non endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy gives surgical results comparable to those of external dacryocystorhinostomy and is a viable alternative where dacryocystorhinostomy is indicated for primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Key words: Endonasal Dacryocystorhinostomy (ENDCR), External Dacryocystorhinostomy (EXDCR), Primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction (PANLDO)   doi: 10.3126/kumj.v6i4.1731  Kathmandu University Medical Journal (2008), Vol. 6, No. 4, Issue 24, 437-442     

scholarly journals OUTCOME OF DACRYOCYSTORHINOSTOMY WITH OR WITHOUT SILICON INTUBATION IN PRIMARY NASOLACRIMAL DUCT OBSTRUCTION

1969 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 55-59
Author(s):  
Haroon Rashid ◽  
Faizur Rahman ◽  
Abid Naseem ◽  
Arshad Iqbal.
Keyword(s):  
Nasolacrimal Duct ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction ◽  
Interventional Study ◽  
Female Ratio ◽  
Duct Obstruction ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Silicon Tube ◽  
Complications Rate ◽  
Age Range ◽  
Male To Female

Objectives: The objective of the study was to compare the outcome of Classical Dacrocystorhinostomy(DCR) alone or with Slicon intubation in patients of primary nasolacrimal duct obstruction.Study design: This is a randomized prospective interventional study performed at Saidu Teaching Hospitalform from 1st January'2006 to 31st December 2006.Material and methods: Diagnosis of nasolacrimal duct obstruction was made on basis of history, clinicalexamination, regurgitation test and syringing of the nasolacrimal passage. Patients were selected byconvenient sampling and were randomized to two groups, for DCR with and without Silicon tube. Silicontube was removed after 4 months of surgery. Patients were followed up to 6 months.Results: Total number of patients was one hundred. Fifty (50%) patients were operated with siliconintubation and 50 (50%) without silicon intubation. Male to female ratio was 1:1.27.Age range was 15 yearsto 80 years. Mean, median and mode ages were 42.54, 47 and 30 years respectively. Eleven patients werelost from the study at various stages and were not included in the results of the study. The complicationsnoted were silicon tube loss in 2 cases, silicon tube displacement in 3 cases and DCR failure in 4 cases.Among the failure, 2 cases belonged to each group with and without silicon intubation.Conclusions: We conclude that the complications rate with and without silicon intubation is the same inprimary nasolacrimal duct obstruction. It is therefore, recommended that silicon intubation may not benecessary in such cases.Key words: DCR, Intubation, NLD Obstruction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document