J Korean Ophthalmol Soc.  2015 Dec;56(12):1821-1825. 10.3341/jkos.2015.56.12.1821.

Results of Silicone Tube Intubation in Patients with Common Canalicular Obstruction in Dacryocystography

• Lee HJ
• Lee MJ

• KMID: 2148740
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2015.56.12.1821

Abstract

PURPOSE
To evaluate the effects of silicone tube intubation in patients showing common canalicular obstruction in dacryocystography.
METHODS
We conducted a retrospective chart review of 136 eyes of 93 patients who underwent silicone tube intubation and who were followed for more than 6 months. The patients were divided into 2 groups: the normal canaliculus group (112 eyes of 72 patients) and the common canalicular obstruction group (24 eyes of 21 patients). The demographic characteristics, degree of nasolacrimal duct obstruction on probing, and functional and anatomical success rates of silicone tube intubation were compared between the two groups. Surgery success was noted when the patient was satisfied with the 'improved' tearing symptom and the tear meniscus height decreased.
RESULTS
On probing, 17 (70.8%) of 27 eyes revealed definite obstructive feeling at nasolacrimal duct in the common canalicular obstruction group, and there was no significant difference compared to the normal canaliculus group (p = 0.639). The anatomical success rate of silicone tube intubation was 91.1% in the normal canaliculus group and 83.3% in the common canalicular obstruction group, and the functional success rate was 85.7% in the normal canaliculus group and 75.0% in the common canalicular obstruction group. There were no significant differences in success rates between the two groups (p = 0.271, p = 0.161, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
Silicone tube intubation can be considered as a primary treatment option for management of common canalicular obstruction.

Keyword

Common canalicular obstruction; Dacryocystography; Silicone tube intubation

MeSH Terms

Humans
Intubation*
Nasolacrimal Duct
Retrospective Studies
Silicon*
Silicones*
Tears
Silicon
Silicones

Figure

• 

  Figure 1. Representative photographs of dacryocystography. (A) Normal canaliculus group. (B) Common canaliculus ob-struction group.

Reference

References

1. Milder B, Demorest BH. Dacryocystography. I. The normal lac-rimal apparatus. AMA Arch Ophthalmol. 1954; 51:180–95.

2. Struck HG, Tost F. Postoperative complications of Toti DCR (dacryocystorhinostomy). An indication for canalicular surgery. Ophthalmologe. 1999; 96:443–7.

3. Ahmadi MA, Esmaeli B. Surgical treatment of canalicular stenosis in patients receiving docetaxel weekly. Arch Ophthalmol. 2001; 119:1802–4.

4. Jeong HW, Cho NC, Ahn M. Result of silicone tube intubation in patients with epiphora who showing normal finding in dacryo- cystography. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2008; 49:706–12.

5. Lee MJ, Choung HK, Kim NJ, Khwarg SI. One-snip punctoplasty and canalicular curettage through the punctum: a minimally in-vasive surgical procedure for primary canaliculitis. Ophthalmology. 2019; 116:2027–30.e2.

6. Jung JJ, Jang SY, Jang JW, In JH. Comparison results of silicone tube intubation according to syringing and dacryocystography. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2014; 55:1584–8.

7. You YG, Choi HS, Ryou JH, Kim SJ. The results of endoscopic ca-naliculocystodacryorhinostomy with two sets of silicone tube in-tubation in canalicular bbstruction. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2004; 45:882–6.

8. Lee TS, Kim JS, Kim JK. The effect of double silicone tube in-tubation on surgical outcome of endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2002; 43:2089–94.

9. Kim DW, Choi MY, Shim WS. Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with canalicular marsupialization in common canalicular obstruction. Can J Ophthalmol. 2013; 48:335–9.

10. Baek BJ, Hwang GR, Jung DH. . Surgical results of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy and lacrimal trephination in distal or com-mon canalicular obstruction. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol. 2012; 5:101–6.

11. Paik JS, Cho WK, Yang SW. Bicanalicular double silicone stenting in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with lacrimal trephination in distal or common canalicular obstruction. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2012; 269:1605–11.

12. Hwang SW, Khwarg SI, Kim JH. . Bicanalicular double sili-cone intubation in external dacryocystorhinostomy and canal-iculoplasty for distal canalicular obstruction. Acta Ophthalmol. 2009; 87:438–42.

13. Mäntynen J, Yoshitsugu M, Rautiainen M. Results of dacryocysto-rhinostomy in 96 patients. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl. 1997; 529:187–9.

14. Weidenbecher M, Hosemann W, Buhr W. Endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: results in 56 patients. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1994; 103:(5 Pt 1). 363–7.

15. Kim JS, Ahn M. Clinical evaluation and classification of nasolacri-mal duct obstruction site by dacryocystography. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2005; 46:191–5.

16. Kim CH, Lew H, Yun YS. Correspondence among the canaliculus irrigation test, dacryocystography and jones test in the epiphora patients. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2007; 48:1017–22.

17. Kim SD, Yang SW, Woo KI. . Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 3rd. Goyang: Naewae haksool;2015. p. 358.

18. Jin SW, Ahn HB, Kim MH. Long-term results of silicone tube in-tubation in patients with common canalicular stenosis. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2012; 53:1373–7.