File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Book Chapter: Debates in Dacryology: The Intubation Dilemma

TitleDebates in Dacryology: The Intubation Dilemma
Authors
Issue Date2015
PublisherSpringer
Citation
Debates in Dacryology: The Intubation Dilemma. In Ali, MJ (Eds.), Principles and Practice of Lacrimal Surgery, p. 347-350 . New Delhi: Springer, 2015 How to Cite?
AbstractThe use of stenting in dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) for primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction (PANDO) in the absence of canalicular disease is controversial. There is no definitive evidence to support the routine use of intubation in DCR for PANDO [1–3]. Advocates for stenting report an increased patency rate, due to presumed maintenance of canalicular and ostial patency [4, 5]. However, recent meta-analyses have not found a significant benefit from routine intubation. In addition, there are reports of a higher failure rate in DCR patients who had routine intubation for PANDO [6]. It has been suggested the higher failure rates are possibly a result of intubation-related granulomatous inflammation. Stenting of the nasolacrimal system is also associated with complications including punctal erosion and “cheese-wiring” of the canaliculi [7].
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/205546
ISBN

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorFigueira, ECen_US
dc.contributor.authorZarkovic, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorMadge, SNen_US
dc.contributor.authorMarcet, MMen_US
dc.contributor.authorSelva, Den_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-09-20T03:54:06Z-
dc.date.available2014-09-20T03:54:06Z-
dc.date.issued2015en_US
dc.identifier.citationDebates in Dacryology: The Intubation Dilemma. In Ali, MJ (Eds.), Principles and Practice of Lacrimal Surgery, p. 347-350 . New Delhi: Springer, 2015en_US
dc.identifier.isbn9788132220190en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/205546-
dc.description.abstractThe use of stenting in dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) for primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction (PANDO) in the absence of canalicular disease is controversial. There is no definitive evidence to support the routine use of intubation in DCR for PANDO [1–3]. Advocates for stenting report an increased patency rate, due to presumed maintenance of canalicular and ostial patency [4, 5]. However, recent meta-analyses have not found a significant benefit from routine intubation. In addition, there are reports of a higher failure rate in DCR patients who had routine intubation for PANDO [6]. It has been suggested the higher failure rates are possibly a result of intubation-related granulomatous inflammation. Stenting of the nasolacrimal system is also associated with complications including punctal erosion and “cheese-wiring” of the canaliculi [7].en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherSpringeren_US
dc.relation.ispartofPrinciples and Practice of Lacrimal Surgeryen_US
dc.titleDebates in Dacryology: The Intubation Dilemmaen_US
dc.typeBook_Chapteren_US
dc.identifier.emailMarcet, MM: marcet@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityMarcet, MM=rp01363en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/978-81-322-2020-6_37-
dc.identifier.hkuros237948en_US
dc.identifier.spage347-
dc.identifier.epage350-
dc.publisher.placeNew Delhien_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats