Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

[Comparison of 2 lacrimal punctal occlusion methods].
Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol 2001; 76(9):533-6AS

Abstract

PURPOSE

To study and compare two methods for canalicular occlusion: Cautery and Punctal Patch.

METHOD

The study included fourty patients divided in two groups of 20 patients. The end point was 4 occluded puncti. The first group underwent deep cauterization resulting in occlusion of the full vertical aspect of the canaliculus. The second group underwent punctal patch technique for canalicular occlusion. Differential parameters were the following: time of intervention, ease of use, risks and precision. In the post operatory, discomfort, subjective and objective improvement in ocular surface as well as long term result of each technique was analysed.

RESULTS

Time of intervention was longer for punctal patch compared to cautery. Both methods exhibited similar ease of use and improvement in ocular surface. Precision was high in punctal patch technique showing complete and final occlusion and no punctum needed reopening, while cautery technique presented 20% rate of reopening intervention. Postoperatory discomfort and irritation were remarkably evident with punctal technique, while minimal in cautery technique.

CONCLUSION

Survival analysis after one year follow up, showed a higher rate of advantages for punctal patch technique over cautery technique.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Hospital Oftalmológico Universitario, Tanta, Egipto, Servicio de Oftalmología, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, España.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
English Abstract
Journal Article

Language

spa

PubMed ID

11592009

Citation

Shalaby, O, et al. "[Comparison of 2 Lacrimal Punctal Occlusion Methods]." Archivos De La Sociedad Espanola De Oftalmologia, vol. 76, no. 9, 2001, pp. 533-6.
Shalaby O, Rivas L, Rivas AI, et al. [Comparison of 2 lacrimal punctal occlusion methods]. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol. 2001;76(9):533-6.
Shalaby, O., Rivas, L., Rivas, A. I., Oroza, M. A., & Murube, J. (2001). [Comparison of 2 lacrimal punctal occlusion methods]. Archivos De La Sociedad Espanola De Oftalmologia, 76(9), pp. 533-6.
Shalaby O, et al. [Comparison of 2 Lacrimal Punctal Occlusion Methods]. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol. 2001;76(9):533-6. PubMed PMID: 11592009.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - [Comparison of 2 lacrimal punctal occlusion methods]. AU - Shalaby,O, AU - Rivas,L, AU - Rivas,A I, AU - Oroza,M A, AU - Murube,J, PY - 2001/10/10/pubmed PY - 2002/8/2/medline PY - 2001/10/10/entrez SP - 533 EP - 6 JF - Archivos de la Sociedad Espanola de Oftalmologia JO - Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol VL - 76 IS - 9 N2 - PURPOSE: To study and compare two methods for canalicular occlusion: Cautery and Punctal Patch. METHOD: The study included fourty patients divided in two groups of 20 patients. The end point was 4 occluded puncti. The first group underwent deep cauterization resulting in occlusion of the full vertical aspect of the canaliculus. The second group underwent punctal patch technique for canalicular occlusion. Differential parameters were the following: time of intervention, ease of use, risks and precision. In the post operatory, discomfort, subjective and objective improvement in ocular surface as well as long term result of each technique was analysed. RESULTS: Time of intervention was longer for punctal patch compared to cautery. Both methods exhibited similar ease of use and improvement in ocular surface. Precision was high in punctal patch technique showing complete and final occlusion and no punctum needed reopening, while cautery technique presented 20% rate of reopening intervention. Postoperatory discomfort and irritation were remarkably evident with punctal technique, while minimal in cautery technique. CONCLUSION: Survival analysis after one year follow up, showed a higher rate of advantages for punctal patch technique over cautery technique. SN - 0365-6691 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/11592009/[Comparison_of_2_lacrimal_punctal_occlusion_methods]_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -