Nonsurgical Retrieval of Retained Lacrimal Stenting Material
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim was to describe a novel technique to retrieve retained stenting material from the lacrimal system. METHODS: In this consecutive case series, the authors reviewed charts of 4 children with retained silicone material in their lacrimal sac following intubation. In 2 children, the presence of the retained material was well documented. The other 2 children were examined for the following clinical triad: history of lacrimal intubation, obstructive symptoms characterized by mucopurulent discharge, and a patent nasolacrimal system on irrigation, highly suggesting retained stenting material in the lacrimal system. Retrieval of the foreign body is achieved by performing an intubation of the superior canaliculus with both arms of a Crawford silicone tube. This forms a loop of silicone tubing that can be retrieved from the nose. As the loop passes through the lacrimal sac and duct, the foreign body material is retrieved and extracted through the nose. RESULTS: In the 4 children on whom this procedure was attempted, it was successful in retrieving the retained piece of silicone on every occasion. In all children, there was complete resolution of the epiphora and chronic dacryocystitis without need for dacryocystorhinostomy. CONCLUSIONS: Retained stenting material can be responsible for persistent obstructive symptoms and chronic dacryocystitis. Patients examined for the clinical triad described should raise suspicion of the possibility of a foreign body in the lacrimal system. This technique should be considered in patients where a retained foreign body is known or suspected, prior to considering dacryocystorhinostomy. When successful, it will be both a diagnostic and therapeutic procedure, and will additionally serve to avoid unnecessary dacryocystorhinostomy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".