Bicanalicular versus monocanalicular intubation after failed probing in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction

被引：0

作者：

Mohammad Taher Rajabi ^{[1
]}

Najmeh Zavarzadeh ^{[1
]}

Alireza Mahmoudi ^{[1
]}

Mohammad Karim Johari ^{[1
]}

Farabi Eye Hospital ^{[1
]}

Yalda Abrishami ^{[1
]}

Mohammad Bagher Rajabi ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Farabi Eye Hospital,Tehran University of Medical Sciences

来源：

International Journal of Ophthalmology | 2016年 / 10期

关键词：

congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction; intubation; failed probing;

D O I：

暂无

中图分类号：

R779.6 [眼外科手术学];

学科分类号：

100212 ;

摘要：

AIM:To investigate the clinical outcomes of different intubation techniques in the cases of failed primary probing.METHODS: This retrospective study was performed on338 patients with the diagnosis of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction with age 1-4y that had failed primary probing.Intubation was performed under light sedation in operating room and the stent was left 3mo in place.Clinical outcome was investigated 3mo after tube removal.RESULTS: Bicanalicular intubation method had higher complete and relative success rates compared to monocanalicular intubation(P =0.00).In addition,Monoka intubation had better outcomes compared to Masterka technique(P =0.046).No difference was found between genders but the higher the age,the better the outcomes with bicanalicular technique rather than monocanalicular.CONCLUSION: Overall success rate of bicanalicular intubation is superior to monocanalicular technique especially in older ages.Also,based upon our clinical outcomes,Masterka intubation is not recommended in cases of failed probing.

引用

页码：1466 / 1470

页数：5

共 11 条

[1] A comparison between monocanalicular and pushed monocanalicular silicone intubation in the treatment of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction[J]. Dima Andalib,Hossein Mansoori.International Journal of Ophthalmology. 2014(06)
[2] Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction: Common Management Policies Among Pediatric Ophthalmologists[J] . Dotan,Gad,Nelson,Leonard B.Journal of Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus . 2015 (1)
[3] Office probing for treatment of nasolacrimal duct obstruction in infants[J] . Aaron M. Miller,Danielle L. Chandler,Michael X. Repka,Darren L. Hoover,Katherine A. Lee,Michele Melia,Paul J. Rychwalski,David I. Silbert.Journal of AAPOS . 2013
[4] Pushed monocanalicular intubation. Pitfalls, deleterious side effects, and complications[J] . B. Fayet,E. Racy,J.-M. Ruban,J. Katowitz.Journal Francais d’Ophtalmologie . 2011 (9)
[5] Monocanalicular versus bicanalicular silicone intubation for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction
Andalib, Dima
Gharabaghi, Davood
Nabai, Reza
Abbaszadeh, Mohammad
[J]. JOURNAL OF AAPOS, 2010, 14 (05): : 421 - 424
[6] Silicone intubation with the Ritleng method using intranasal endoscopy to treat congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction
Pelit, Aysel
Caylakli, Fatma
Yaycioglu, Rana Altan
Akova, Yonca
[J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY, 2009, 73 (11) : 1536 - 1538
[7] Primary surgical treatment of nasolacrimal duct obstruction in children younger than 4 years of age
Kushner, Burton J.
[J]. JOURNAL OF AAPOS, 2008, 12 (05): : 427 - 428
[8] Monocanalicular silastic intubation for the initial correction of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction
Engel, J. Mark
Hichie-Schmidt, Claire
Khammar, Alexander
Ostfeld, Barbara M.
Vyas, Amy
Ticho, Benjamin H.
[J]. JOURNAL OF AAPOS, 2007, 11 (02): : 183 - 186
[9] Silicone intubation with the Ritleng method in children with congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction
Yazici, Bulent
Akarsu, Cengiz
Salkaya, Muhsin
[J]. JOURNAL OF AAPOS, 2006, 10 (04): : 328 - 332
[10] Nasolacrimal duct obstruction in children: Outcome of intubation[J] . Charmaine S. Lim,Frank Martin,Ted Beckenham,Robert G. Cumming.Journal of AAPOS . 2004 (5)

← 1 2 →