MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2073366593 · doi:10.1097/iop.0b013e3181b80af6

Endonasal Dacryocystorhinostomy: A Modified Technique With Preservation of the Nasal and Lacrimal Mucosa

2010· article· en· W2073366593 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueOphthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueNasolacrimal Duct Obstruction Treatments
Établissements canadiensMcGill UniversityRoyal Victoria Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineDacryocystorhinostomyLacrimal sacSurgeryMucous membrane of noseDacryocystitisNasolacrimal ductNasolacrimal duct obstructionLacrimal apparatusNasal boneMaxillaNoseNasal septumDentistryAnatomy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

PURPOSE: In the last 15 years, endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy (End-DCR) has become an alternative to external dacryocystorhinostomy. In most series reported, it appears that End-DCR had a higher failure rate than Ext-DCR. Uncontrolled epithelialization of the surgical site as compared with the fashioning of mucosal flaps may explain the somewhat lower success rate. The purpose of our study is to validate a modification of a new technique described by Tsirbas and Wormald in which the nasal mucosa is preserved and brought in contact with the lacrimal mucosa during End-DCR, leaving an epithelialized surgical site at the end of the operation. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed from November 2001 to January 2003. Patients with epiphora and or chronic or recurrent dacryocystitis were evaluated. Patients with symptomatic nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO) and who met the criteria for End-DCR were selected. NLDO was diagnosed based on symptoms, along with a blocked irrigation or an abnormal bone substract dacryocystogram. The surgical procedure involved a manual osteotomy of the frontal process of the maxilla and removal of the lacrimal bone with the creation of posteriorly hinged lacrimal sac and nasal mucosal flaps. RESULTS: Forty-five patients underwent End-DCR with preservation of the lacrimal and nasal mucosa. Five patients had bilateral surgery. A total of 50 surgeries were performed. Twenty-four surgeries were performed on the right side and 26 on the left. Patients were evaluated at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months after surgery. Evaluation included asking about subjective symptoms of epiphora, lacrimal irrigation on the 3 visits, and endoscopic evaluation of the surgical site at 3 months. Surgery was considered successful when patients did have relief of their epiphora and had a patent system with irrigation. Forty-nine patients (98%) were asymptomatic at 1 month and at 3 months with both a patent system tested with irrigation and a patent ostium evaluated with the endoscope. One patient who had undergone bilateral surgery had blockage of the fistula on the left side at 3 months. The patient underwent endoscopic revision surgery and was patent 1 year afterward. A phone survey was performed from January to May 2008. Thirty-four patients (75%) were reached. Two patients were still tearing and were brought for reassessment. One had an open lacrimal system and one was blocked. CONCLUSIONS: This study validates the concept of preserving the lacrimal and nasal mucosa through an endoscopic approach to treat NLDO. Early and controlled lining of the fistula with mucosal flaps appears to prevent closure of the ostium and leads to a high success rate comparable with that of external dacryocystorhinostomy. This can be accomplished successfully with a manual osteotomy thus avoiding the use of power drills and burrs.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,062
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,493

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,012
Tête enseignante GPT0,225
Écart entre enseignants0,213 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle