A prospective, randomised comparison of probing versus bicanalicular silastic intubation for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction

Al-Faky, Yasser H; Mousa, Ahmed; Kalantan, Hatem; Alotaibi, Abdullah; AlOdan, Hessah A.; Alsuhaibani, Adel H.

doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305376

Cited by 30 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Weitere Studien konnten zeigen, dass der Einsatz von Silikonstützma-terialien bei komplexen Situationen sehr sinnvoll ist. Hierdurch konnte die Heilungsrate von 47-52 % auf 85-91 % gesteigert werden [25,26]. Diese Ergebnisse konnten auch durch unsere Untersuchungen bestätigt werden.…”

Section: Diskussionunclassified

Behandlung kindlicher Tränenwegsstenosen

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Diskussionunclassified

Behandlung kindlicher Tränenwegsstenosen

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Five studies were not RCTs (one case series: Chaabouni 1993; one that provided various treatments to patients for NLDO in a particular order in which they only received probing if all previous procedures had failed: Ekinciler 1994; and three that described probing surgery in a narrative format: Hernandez 1967; Ishikawa 1990; Robb 1985). We excluded one study that compared probing to a another surgical procedure (bicanalicular silastic intubation) for treating NLDO (Al-Faky 2015). …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction

Petris

Liu

2017

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO) is a common condition causing excessive tearing in the first year of life. Infants present with excessive tearing or mucoid discharge from the eyes due to blockage of the nasolacrimal duct system, which can result in maceration of the skin of the eyelids and local infections, such as conjunctivitis, that may require antibiotics. The incidence of nasolacrimal duct obstruction in early childhood ranges from 5% to 20% and often resolves without surgery. Treatment options for this condition are either conservative therapy, including observation (or deferred probing), massage of the lacrimal sac and antibiotics, or probing the nasolacrimal duct to open the membranous obstruction at the distal nasolacrimal duct. Probing may be performed without anesthesia in the office setting or under general anesthesia in the operating room. Probing may serve to resolve the symptoms by opening the membranous obstruction; however, it may not be successful if the obstruction is due to a bony protrusion of the inferior turbinate into the nasolacrimal duct or when the duct is edematous (swollen) due to infection such as dacryocystitis. Additionally, potential complications with probing include creation of a false passage and injury to the nasolacrimal duct, canaliculi and puncta, bleeding, laryngospasm, or aspiration. Objectives To assess the effects of probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register (2016, Issue 8); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 30 August 2016); Embase.com (1947 to 30 August 2016); PubMed (1948 to 30 August 2016); LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database; 1982 to 30 August 2016), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), last searched 14 August 2014; ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov), searched 30 August 2016; and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en), searched 30 August 2016. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. Selection criteria We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared probing (office-based or hospital-based under general anesthesia) versus no (or deferred) probing or other interventions (observation alone, antibiotic drops only, or antibiotic drops plus massage of the nasolacrimal duct). We did not include studies that compared different probing techniques or probing compared with other surgical procedures. We included studies in children aged three weeks to four years who may have presented with tearing and conjunctivitis. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion and independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias for the included studies. We analyzed data using Review Manager software and evaluated the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. Main...

show abstract

“…After birth, it was shown that more than 30% of infants 11 months and 9.5 years, the overall success rate was 85%, the success rate was 89% for eyes in children with Down syndrome and the success rate was 85% for eyes in children without Down syndrome. Al-Faky et al 20 . reported 207 eyes of 181 children between 1 and 8 years old with CNLDO who had not undergone previous surgical treatment were included in the study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retrospective Evaluation of Surgical Methods and Outcomes of Pediatric Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction According to Age Groups

Çınar¹,

Şimşek²,

Yetkin³

et al. 2019

Kafkas J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: To evaluate the outcomes of different surgical methods in nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO) in pediatric patients according to age groups. Material and Method: Patients with NLDO were included in the study. Records of patients who underwent nasolacrimal duct (NLD) probing, silicone tube intubation or endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (CNLDO) or acquired NLDO between 2015 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. The age of the patients during the surgery, the status of postoperative watering complaints and the presence of epiphora were analyzed according to age groups. Results: Of 150 patients, 77/150 (51.3%) were female, 73/150 (48.7%) were male. The mean age of patients was 22.3 (1 month-8 years) months. In this study, 174 eyes of 150 patients with NLDO were included. Patients were divided into four groups in terms of age groups at the time of admittance. A hundred percent of the first group (0-12 months) was treated successfully with the NLD probing. However, in the second group (12-24 months), the success rate was 81.8% with the NLD probing. In the third group (24-48 months), the success rate of NLD probing decreased to 52.4%, while the success rate of silicone tube intubation was 100% in the same age group. In the fourth group (48 months or over), the success rate of NLD probing decreased to 20%, while all procedures performed with endoscopic DCR and silicone tube intubation were successful. Conclusion: Pediatric patients with NLDO, the choice of the treatment procedure and the success rate of treatment vary according to age group. NLD probing procedure is a safe and effective treatment method for CNLDO in cases that are unresponsive to conservative treatment in the first 12 months of life. As the patients' age increases, the success of the NLD probing decreases. However, prior to an invasive treatment modality, NLD probing procedure is recommended more than one time.

show abstract

A prospective, randomised comparison of probing versus bicanalicular silastic intubation for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction

Abstract: Probing for simple CNLDO in young children is adequate. Bicanalicular silastic intubation seems to have a role in achieving successful outcomes in complex CNLDO.

Cited by 30 publications

References 23 publications

Behandlung kindlicher Tränenwegsstenosen

Behandlung kindlicher Tränenwegsstenosen

Probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction

Retrospective Evaluation of Surgical Methods and Outcomes of Pediatric Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction According to Age Groups

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About