Randomized study comparing the efficacy of a self-retaining bicanaliculus intubation stent with Crawford intubation in patients with canalicular obstruction
Syed Ziaeddin Tabatabaie, Mohammad Taher Rajabi, Mohammad Bagher Rajabi, Bahram EshraghiEye Research Center, Farabi Eye Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, IranBackground: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of self-retaining stent (SRS) bicanalicular intubatio...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Dove Medical Press
2011
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/ac054d2bb88443bf9eaf33b7da5a8b37 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Syed Ziaeddin Tabatabaie, Mohammad Taher Rajabi, Mohammad Bagher Rajabi, Bahram EshraghiEye Research Center, Farabi Eye Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, IranBackground: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of self-retaining stent (SRS) bicanalicular intubation with bicanalicular silicone (Crawford) intubation in patients with canalicular and punctal obstruction.Methods: In this prospective, randomized clinical trial, 38 patients with canalicular or punctal obstruction (25 partial, 13 complete) and epiphora were randomized into two groups. Twenty-one patients (14 with partial and seven with complete obstruction) underwent SRS intubation and 17 patients underwent bicanalicular silicon intubation in a randomized fashion.Results: After a mean follow-up of 6 months following tube removal, 16 (76%, 12 partial, four complete) of the 21 eyes in the SRS intubation group and 13 (76%, 10 partial, three complete) in the bicanalicular silicon intubation group had a successful outcome and remained symptom-free. For partial obstructions, the success rate was 85% and 90% for the SRS and bicanalicular silicon intubation groups, respectively. The corresponding values for complete obstruction were 63% and 50% for the SRS and bicanalicular silicon intubation groups, respectively.Conclusion: SRS could effectively substitute for a more extensive procedure such as bicanalicular silicon intubation in patients with canalicular obstruction, particularly those with partial obstruction. The newly developed SRS intubation procedure has the advantages of simple, easy implementation and extubation, low cost, and a lower rate of trauma when compared with bicanalicular silicon intubation.Keywords: self-retaining bicanalicular intubation, Crawford intubation, canalicular obstruction |
|---|