M Orhan1, P Cal, M Onerci, M Irkeç. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Medical Faculty, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare conventional and endoscopic probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction in infants. METHODS: Conventional probing was performed in 22 eyes of 18 patients, age range 7-14 months (mean 11.4 months). Probing was done with intranasal endoscopic visualization in 18 eyes of 14 patients, age range 7-13 months (mean 11.2 months). All were primary probing cases. RESULTS: After conventional probing 2 of the 22 cases required reprobing. After endoscopic probing only 1 of the 18 cases required reprobing. CONCLUSIONS: In most cases of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction endoscopy is not required; however, in failed cases direct visualization of the inferior meatus with endoscopic guidance may be helpful.
PURPOSE: To compare conventional and endoscopic probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction in infants. METHODS: Conventional probing was performed in 22 eyes of 18 patients, age range 7-14 months (mean 11.4 months). Probing was done with intranasal endoscopic visualization in 18 eyes of 14 patients, age range 7-13 months (mean 11.2 months). All were primary probing cases. RESULTS: After conventional probing 2 of the 22 cases required reprobing. After endoscopic probing only 1 of the 18 cases required reprobing. CONCLUSIONS: In most cases of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction endoscopy is not required; however, in failed cases direct visualization of the inferior meatus with endoscopic guidance may be helpful.
Authors: Aldo Vagge; Lorenzo Ferro Desideri; Paolo Nucci; Massimiliano Serafino; Giuseppe Giannaccare; Andrea Lembo; Carlo Enrico Traverso Journal: Diseases Date: 2018-10-22