Ophthalmology · 2000
Clinical efficacy of the polyurethane stent without fluoroscopic guidance in the treatment of nasolacrimal duct obstruction.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lee J S, Jung G, Oum B S, Lee S H, Roh H J
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of the polyurethane (Song) stent in the treatment of nasolacrimal duct obstruction without fluoroscopic guidance, especially at the junction between the lacrimal sac and nasolacrimal duct or at the nasolacrimal duct.
DESIGN: Retrospective noncomparative case series.
PARTICIPANTS: This study evaluated 59 cases of nasolacrimal duct obstruction in 53 patients, with mean epiphora of 36 months (range, 2 months-17 years).
METHODS: Without the assistance of a radiologist, a polyurethane nasolacrimal stent was placed by introducing a guidewire through the superior or inferior punctum into the canaliculus and advancing it across the obstruction into the opening of the inferior meatus of the nasal cavity. The mean follow-up period was 22 months (range, 12 months-48 months).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patency of the lacrimal passage to irrigation and the duration of this procedure.
RESULTS: Complete resolution of epiphora was accomplished in 55 (93.2%) of the 59 eyes. There was recurrence of epiphora in four cases because of obstruction of the stent in three cases and obstruction of the common canaliculus by recurrent dacryocystitis in one case.
CONCLUSIONS: Polyurethane stenting without fluoroscopic guidance seems to be a valuable technique for primary management of nasolacrimal duct obstruction before dacryocystorhinostomy.
DESIGN: Retrospective noncomparative case series.
PARTICIPANTS: This study evaluated 59 cases of nasolacrimal duct obstruction in 53 patients, with mean epiphora of 36 months (range, 2 months-17 years).
METHODS: Without the assistance of a radiologist, a polyurethane nasolacrimal stent was placed by introducing a guidewire through the superior or inferior punctum into the canaliculus and advancing it across the obstruction into the opening of the inferior meatus of the nasal cavity. The mean follow-up period was 22 months (range, 12 months-48 months).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patency of the lacrimal passage to irrigation and the duration of this procedure.
RESULTS: Complete resolution of epiphora was accomplished in 55 (93.2%) of the 59 eyes. There was recurrence of epiphora in four cases because of obstruction of the stent in three cases and obstruction of the common canaliculus by recurrent dacryocystitis in one case.
CONCLUSIONS: Polyurethane stenting without fluoroscopic guidance seems to be a valuable technique for primary management of nasolacrimal duct obstruction before dacryocystorhinostomy.