Transcanalicular-Endonasal Semiconductor Diode Laser–Assisted Revision Surgery for Failed External Dacryocystorhinostomy

Narioka, Junji; Ohashi, Yuichi

doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2008.02.028

Cited by 55 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Fistül açıklığı ne kadar küçük ise yara iyileşmesi sürecinde kapanma oranı artar. Silikon tüp yerleştirilmesi ve oluşturulan fistül bölgesine mitomisin C uygulanması [11][12] bu komplikasyonu önlemek için uygulanan bir yöntemdir.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Comparison of Endolaser Dacryocystorhinostomy and External Dacryocyctorhinostomy Results

Kocatürk¹,

Zengin²,

Çakmak³

et al. 2013

Med-Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionunclassified

Comparison of Endolaser Dacryocystorhinostomy and External Dacryocyctorhinostomy Results

Kocatürk¹,

Zengin²,

Çakmak³

et al. 2013

Med-Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Herzellah et al [2] compared drill and Kerrison rounger use in endoscopic DCR surgery and did not detect any difference between two methods in terms of success rate and complication ratio. Narioka and Ohashi [8] reported that use of laser in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy operation can reduce operation time, amount of bleeding and recovery period; and also reported that its success rate was high. On the other hand Neyt et al [9] used microdebrider in endoscopic DCR operation and suggested that it is a safe and effective method.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting unsuccessful endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy

Çukurova¹

2017

Kulak Burun Bogaz Ihtis Derg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: This study aims to investigate the reasons for failed dacryocystorhinostomy in patients who underwent revision surgery. Patients and Methods:A total of 48 patients (31 females, 17 males; mean age 39.8±14.2 year; range 23 to 55 years) who underwent revision endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy between January 2010 and January 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. The reasons for revision surgery, dacryocystorhinostomy methods in the initial operations, and additional pathologies in the initial operations were recorded. Results:We found that failed endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy operations were those with chisel-hammer with a slight difference (p>0.05) and the most common reason for revision was inadequate bone window opening (p<0.05). Application of septoplasty operation in the same session with endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy also reduced the success rate (p>0.05). Conclusion:Our study results that adequate bone window opening is more important than the instrument which is used for opening bone window in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. In addition, we suggest that septoplasty should not be applied in the same session with endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy, as it can reduce the success rate. Bulgular: Başarısız olan endoskopik dakriyosistorinostomi ameliyatların çok az farkla guj-çekiç ile yapılanlar olduğu (p>0.05) ve arasında en sık revizyon nedeninin yeterli açılmamış kemik pencere olduğu saptandı (p<0.05). Endoskopik dakriyosistorinostomi ile aynı seansta yapılan septoplasti ameliyatının da başarı oranını düşürdüğü belirlendi (p>0.05).Sonuç: Çalışma sonuçlarımız endoskopik dakriyosistorinostomide kemik pencere açılmasında kullanılan aletten daha çok, yeterli genişlikte açılmış kemik pencerenin önemli olduğunu göstermektedir. Ayrıca başarı oranını düşürebileceği için, septoplastinin endoskopik dakriyosistorinostomi ile aynı seansta uygulanmamasını öneririz.Anahtar Sözcükler: Dakriyosistorinostomi; endoskopik; revizyon.

show abstract

“…The application of laser dacryocystorhinostomy began with the use of lasers in lacrimal surgery. Endocanolicular laser dacryocystorhinostomy with diode laser in adult cases has been reported in literature [8][9][10][11]. There are no reported studies of endocanalicular laser dacryocystorhinostomy using a multidiode laser in children.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%