Outcomes of Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction Surgery Converted into Balloon Dilation and Silicone Intubation due to Probing Difficulty.
Journal
Journal of ophthalmology
ISSN: 2090-004X
Titre abrégé: J Ophthalmol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101524199
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
15
11
2021
accepted:
09
02
2022
entrez:
22
3
2022
pubmed:
23
3
2022
medline:
23
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To report the outcomes of balloon catheter dilatation and silicone intubation as a sequential secondary surgery under the same anesthesia, a stepwise approach for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO) when probing and irrigation as primary procedure fails. A retrospective study included children with NLDO who underwent probing and irrigation only, and those who underwent in the same surgery under anesthesia, adjunct balloon catheter dilation and silicone intubation due to difficulty of the probe passage or fluid regurgitation from the punctum. The primary outcome was surgical success defined as resolution of preoperative symptoms and signs at 1 month. A total of 105 NLDO cases were included. Eighty-four cases underwent probing and irrigation only, whereas 21 cases required balloon dilation and silicone intubation consecutively after the first procedure. Patient age at surgery was higher for those requiring balloon dilatation and intubation (30.3 ± 8.0 months) when compared to those with probing and irrigation only (22.4 ± 10.3 months, The surgical team may prepare to proceed with secondary surgery under the same anesthesia after the initial attempt of probing and irrigation. This stepwise two-stage approach in patients with congenital NLDO failing primary surgery resulted in a high success rate with minimal interventions, avoiding repeated general anesthesia.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
To report the outcomes of balloon catheter dilatation and silicone intubation as a sequential secondary surgery under the same anesthesia, a stepwise approach for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO) when probing and irrigation as primary procedure fails.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
A retrospective study included children with NLDO who underwent probing and irrigation only, and those who underwent in the same surgery under anesthesia, adjunct balloon catheter dilation and silicone intubation due to difficulty of the probe passage or fluid regurgitation from the punctum. The primary outcome was surgical success defined as resolution of preoperative symptoms and signs at 1 month.
Results
UNASSIGNED
A total of 105 NLDO cases were included. Eighty-four cases underwent probing and irrigation only, whereas 21 cases required balloon dilation and silicone intubation consecutively after the first procedure. Patient age at surgery was higher for those requiring balloon dilatation and intubation (30.3 ± 8.0 months) when compared to those with probing and irrigation only (22.4 ± 10.3 months,
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
The surgical team may prepare to proceed with secondary surgery under the same anesthesia after the initial attempt of probing and irrigation. This stepwise two-stage approach in patients with congenital NLDO failing primary surgery resulted in a high success rate with minimal interventions, avoiding repeated general anesthesia.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35313506
doi: 10.1155/2022/4045789
pmc: PMC8934212
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
4045789Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Oren Yaakov Sagiv et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors report that there are no conflicts of interest.
Références
J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2015 Jan-Feb;52(1):14-9
pubmed: 25365513
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2016 Aug;273(8):2079-84
pubmed: 26732693
J AAPOS. 2007 Apr;11(2):183-6
pubmed: 17307001
Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004 Sep;20(5):352-7
pubmed: 15377901
J AAPOS. 2001 Jun;5(3):139-42
pubmed: 11404738
Semin Ophthalmol. 2018;33(3):435-442
pubmed: 29069710
Diseases. 2018 Oct 22;6(4):
pubmed: 30360371
Arch Ophthalmol. 2009 May;127(5):633-9
pubmed: 19433712
Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2019 Sep;30(5):364-371
pubmed: 31219833
J AAPOS. 2012 Apr;16(2):173-6
pubmed: 22525175
Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2021 Jan-Feb;84(1):91-98
pubmed: 33470349
Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017 Sep/Oct;33(5):350-354
pubmed: 27636242
J AAPOS. 2008 Oct;12(5):445-50
pubmed: 18595756
Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 1985;1(1):75-6
pubmed: 3940108
Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2013 Sep;24(5):421-4
pubmed: 23846190
Eye (Lond). 1991;5 ( Pt 5):596-600
pubmed: 1794426
Eur J Ophthalmol. 2000 Apr-Jun;10(2):128-31
pubmed: 10887923
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2015 Mar;79(3):301-4
pubmed: 25595447
Pediatr Clin North Am. 2014 Jun;61(3):529-39
pubmed: 24852150
Ophthalmology. 2021 Jun;128(6):920-927
pubmed: 33358412
Am J Ophthalmol. 2000 Jul;130(1):42-8
pubmed: 11004258
Can J Ophthalmol. 2016 Feb;51(1):34-40
pubmed: 26874157
Ophthalmology. 1998 Jul;105(7):1307-9; discussion 1309-10
pubmed: 9663238
Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006 Jul-Aug;22(4):243-7
pubmed: 16855492
J Craniofac Surg. 2022 Jan-Feb 01;33(1):211-213
pubmed: 34292239
Br J Ophthalmol. 2011 May;95(5):634-6
pubmed: 20935303