Araştırma Makalesi

Comparison of success rates of probing surgery in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction by age range

Cilt: 48 Sayı: 1 31 Mart 2023
PDF İndir
TR EN

Comparison of success rates of probing surgery in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction by age range

Öz

Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of probing surgery in patients with congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (CNLDO) according to application time and age groups. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, patients with CNLDO who were followed up at Cukurova University Faculty of Medicine between 2012 and 2022 were evaluated. One hundred thirteen eyes of 90 patients with CNLDO were included in the study. The fluorescein dye disappearance test was used to evaluate the diagnosis and treatment success. The demographic characteristics of the patients and the success of the surgeries were recorded. Results: Considering the first probing surgical time, our success rates according to age groups were as follows: 0-12 months (n=10) 100%, 12-18 months (n=29) 86.2%, 18-24 months (n=24) 87.5%, 24-36 months (n=24) 79.2%, 36-48 months (n=14) 57.1%, and 66.7% in patients aged 48 months and older (n=12). When our entire patient group was evaluated regarding success before and after age 2 years, the rate was 88.9% in patients younger than 24 months (n=63), and 70% in patients aged 24 months and older (n=50). Conclusion: In our study, the most successful age ranges for probing surgery were found as 0-12 months, 12-18 months, and 18-24 months. Probing surgery should be performed for patients with congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction before the age of 2 years because the success rates decreased in patients older than 2 years in our study.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction, probing, epiphora

Kaynakça

  1. Lekskul A, Preechaharn P, Jongkhajornpong P, Wuthisiri W. Age-specific outcomes of conservative approach and probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Clin Ophthalmol. 2022;16:1821-8.
  2. Petris C, Liu D. Probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Cochrane Database Syst Rew. 2017;7:CD011109.
  3. Farat JG, Schellini SA, Dib RE, Santos FGD, Meneghim RLFS, Jorge EC. Probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2021;84:91-8.
  4. Yang W, Shen L, Wang A, Li M, Yang C. Bacterial culture of tear duct infections secondary to congenital nasolacrimal duct obstructions. J Ophthalmol. 2022;2022:9954634.
  5. Sagiv OY, Nemet A, Achiron A, Neumann D, Tuuminen R, Spierer O. Outcomes of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction surgery converted into balloon dilation and silicone intubation due to probing difficulty. J Ophthalmol. 2022;4045789:1-6.
  6. Eshraghi B, Tehrani MJ, Tayebi F, Momenaei B. Monocanalicular intubation in children with incomplete complex congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction older than five years of age. J Curr Ophthalmol. 2022;33:481-4.
  7. Nakayama T, Watanabe A, Rajak S, Yamanaka Y, Sotozono C. Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstructioncontinous trend for spontaneous resolution beyond first year of life. Br J Ophthalmol. 2020;104:116163.
  8. Bothra N, Bansal O, Sharma A, Ali MJ. Congenital nasolacrimal duct obsruction update study (CUP Study): Report III. Analysis of earlier failed probing without endoscopy guidance. Semin Ophthalmol. 2022;37:249-52.
  9. Swierczynska M, Tobicyzk E, Rodak P, Barchanowska D, Filipek E. Success rates of probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction at various ages. BMC Ophthalmol. 2020;20:403.
  10. Killedar M, Sasurkar P, Gokhale N, Shah M, Visapure R. Retrospective analysis of silicone intubation by Ritleng probe and Sutupak suture fixed in silicone tube in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2021;69:209598.

Kaynak Göster

APA
Ulaş, B., Özcan, A., & Ademoğlu, M. (2023). Comparison of success rates of probing surgery in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction by age range. Cukurova Medical Journal, 48(1), 101-108. https://doi.org/10.17826/cumj.1186079
AMA
1.Ulaş B, Özcan A, Ademoğlu M. Comparison of success rates of probing surgery in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction by age range. Cukurova Med J. 2023;48(1):101-108. doi:10.17826/cumj.1186079
Chicago
Ulaş, Burak, Altan Özcan, ve Merve Ademoğlu. 2023. “Comparison of success rates of probing surgery in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction by age range”. Cukurova Medical Journal 48 (1): 101-8. https://doi.org/10.17826/cumj.1186079.
EndNote
Ulaş B, Özcan A, Ademoğlu M (01 Mart 2023) Comparison of success rates of probing surgery in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction by age range. Cukurova Medical Journal 48 1 101–108.
IEEE
[1]B. Ulaş, A. Özcan, ve M. Ademoğlu, “Comparison of success rates of probing surgery in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction by age range”, Cukurova Med J, c. 48, sy 1, ss. 101–108, Mar. 2023, doi: 10.17826/cumj.1186079.
ISNAD
Ulaş, Burak - Özcan, Altan - Ademoğlu, Merve. “Comparison of success rates of probing surgery in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction by age range”. Cukurova Medical Journal 48/1 (01 Mart 2023): 101-108. https://doi.org/10.17826/cumj.1186079.
JAMA
1.Ulaş B, Özcan A, Ademoğlu M. Comparison of success rates of probing surgery in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction by age range. Cukurova Med J. 2023;48:101–108.
MLA
Ulaş, Burak, vd. “Comparison of success rates of probing surgery in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction by age range”. Cukurova Medical Journal, c. 48, sy 1, Mart 2023, ss. 101-8, doi:10.17826/cumj.1186079.
Vancouver
1.Burak Ulaş, Altan Özcan, Merve Ademoğlu. Comparison of success rates of probing surgery in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction by age range. Cukurova Med J. 01 Mart 2023;48(1):101-8. doi:10.17826/cumj.1186079