...
首页> 外文期刊>Canadian journal of ophthalmology >Comparison of nonlaser nonendoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy with external dacryocystorhinostomy.
【24h】

Comparison of nonlaser nonendoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy with external dacryocystorhinostomy.

机译:非激光非内镜鼻腔泪囊鼻腔吻合术与外部泪囊鼻腔吻合术的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objective: To compare the success rate of nonlaser nonendoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (EN-DCR) with that of externalDCR(EX-DCR). Design: Retrospective chart review. Participants: Eighty-eight patients that underwent 102 consecutive EN-DCR or EX-DCR between November 1, 1995, and September 1, 2003. Methods: All DCRswere performed by a single ophthalmologist. The surgical protocol remained constant, and surgical success was defined as a lack of symptoms that indicated DCR or normal canalicular irrigation. Results: Eighty-eight patients were reviewed, equating to 102 cases ofDCR (56 EX-DCRand 46 EN-DCR). The average age of patients was 63.2+/-18.2 years old (range, 19-93 years), and the average duration of surgery was 32.1 minutes for EX-DCR and 23.3 minutes for ENDCR (p < 0.0001). Three cases of intraoperative bleed requiring nasal packing were documented in EX-DCR and 2 cases in EN-DCR. The success rates were 89.8% and 90.2% for EX-DCR and EN-DCR, respectively. There was no statistical difference between these 2 numbers. The average follow-up time was 12.8 months (median, 5 months; range, 2-97 months). Conclusions: We found that the endonasal approach to DCRs was quicker than the external approach and the success and complication rates of both methods were comparable.
机译:目的:比较非激光非内镜下泪囊鼻腔吻合术(EN-DCR)与外部DCR(EX-DCR)的成功率。设计:回顾性图表审查。参与者:1995年11月1日至2003年9月1日之间连续接受102例EN-DCR或EX-DCR的88例患者。方法:所有DCR均由一名眼科医生进行。手术方案保持不变,手术成功定义为缺乏表明DCR或正常小管冲洗的症状。结果:共检查了88例患者,共102例DCR(56例EX-DCR和46例EN-DCR)。患者的平均年龄为63.2 +/- 18.2岁(范围19-93岁),EX-DCR的平均手术时间为32.1分钟,ENDCR的平均手术时间为23.3分钟(p <0.0001)。 EX-DCR记录了3例需要鼻腔填充的术中出血,EN-DCR记录了2例。 EX-DCR和EN-DCR的成功率分别为89.8%和90.2%。这两个数字之间没有统计学差异。平均随访时间为12.8个月(中位数为5个月;范围为2-97个月)。结论:我们发现鼻内DCRs法比外部方法更快,并且两种方法的成功率和并发症发生率均相当。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号