Autostable-II stent versus bicanalicular silicon intubation for management of lacrimal canalicular obstruction

Purpose To compare the anatomical and functional results of the use of Autostable-II self-retaining stent (A-II SRS) and bicanalicular silicone tube (BST) in the treatment of epiphora due to distal or common canalicular obstruction. Setting and design This prospective, comparative, interventional st...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Zamzam M.A. Khalil, Raafat M.A. Abdallah, Ahmed M.K. Elshafei, Amr A.M. Abdelrahman
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2025-01-01
Series:Journal of the Egyptian Ophthalmological Society
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journals.lww.com/10.4103/ejos.ejos_38_24
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1825199244270632960
author Zamzam M.A. Khalil
Raafat M.A. Abdallah
Ahmed M.K. Elshafei
Amr A.M. Abdelrahman
author_facet Zamzam M.A. Khalil
Raafat M.A. Abdallah
Ahmed M.K. Elshafei
Amr A.M. Abdelrahman
author_sort Zamzam M.A. Khalil
collection DOAJ
description Purpose To compare the anatomical and functional results of the use of Autostable-II self-retaining stent (A-II SRS) and bicanalicular silicone tube (BST) in the treatment of epiphora due to distal or common canalicular obstruction. Setting and design This prospective, comparative, interventional study was conducted at El Minia University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Ophthalmology. Patients and methods This study included 80 eyes of 65 patients and was performed from March 2020 to June 2021 in Minia University Hospital. Detailed history taking, anterior segment examination, lacrimal probing, and syringing were done. The patients were evaluated 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months postoperatively when A-II SRS and BST were removed and 3 months after their removal. Results Eighty eyes of 56 patients with distal canalicular obstruction were evaluated in this study. Patients in group A were treated using A-II SRS (FCI), and patients in group B were treated by BST (EAGLE LABS). Results revealed a highly statistically significant difference between the two groups in epiphora grading 1 day postoperatively (P=0.013) and no significant difference between the two groups postoperatively at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. Objective improvement indicated by fluorescein dye disappearance test by the end of the follow-up period revealed no significant difference between the two studied groups (P=0.39). Regarding tube position, in group A, two (5%) stents were extruded. In group B, only one (2.5%) was prolapsed and removed by the end of the first month. Conclusion The advantage of A-II SRS set over BST intubation surgery for lacrimal canalicular obstruction is easy placement without general anesthesia. However, extra costs are needed for A-II SRS, which is an important issue in areas with low economic income.
format Article
id doaj-art-35f3b5972ee546d09c23682d7e6e2881
institution Kabale University
issn 2090-0686
language English
publishDate 2025-01-01
publisher Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
record_format Article
series Journal of the Egyptian Ophthalmological Society
spelling doaj-art-35f3b5972ee546d09c23682d7e6e28812025-02-08T05:26:31ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of the Egyptian Ophthalmological Society2090-06862025-01-011181374210.4103/ejos.ejos_38_24Autostable-II stent versus bicanalicular silicon intubation for management of lacrimal canalicular obstructionZamzam M.A. KhalilRaafat M.A. AbdallahAhmed M.K. ElshafeiAmr A.M. AbdelrahmanPurpose To compare the anatomical and functional results of the use of Autostable-II self-retaining stent (A-II SRS) and bicanalicular silicone tube (BST) in the treatment of epiphora due to distal or common canalicular obstruction. Setting and design This prospective, comparative, interventional study was conducted at El Minia University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Ophthalmology. Patients and methods This study included 80 eyes of 65 patients and was performed from March 2020 to June 2021 in Minia University Hospital. Detailed history taking, anterior segment examination, lacrimal probing, and syringing were done. The patients were evaluated 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months postoperatively when A-II SRS and BST were removed and 3 months after their removal. Results Eighty eyes of 56 patients with distal canalicular obstruction were evaluated in this study. Patients in group A were treated using A-II SRS (FCI), and patients in group B were treated by BST (EAGLE LABS). Results revealed a highly statistically significant difference between the two groups in epiphora grading 1 day postoperatively (P=0.013) and no significant difference between the two groups postoperatively at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. Objective improvement indicated by fluorescein dye disappearance test by the end of the follow-up period revealed no significant difference between the two studied groups (P=0.39). Regarding tube position, in group A, two (5%) stents were extruded. In group B, only one (2.5%) was prolapsed and removed by the end of the first month. Conclusion The advantage of A-II SRS set over BST intubation surgery for lacrimal canalicular obstruction is easy placement without general anesthesia. However, extra costs are needed for A-II SRS, which is an important issue in areas with low economic income.https://journals.lww.com/10.4103/ejos.ejos_38_24autostable-ii self-retaining stentbicanalicular silicone tubecanalicular obstructionepiphora
spellingShingle Zamzam M.A. Khalil
Raafat M.A. Abdallah
Ahmed M.K. Elshafei
Amr A.M. Abdelrahman
Autostable-II stent versus bicanalicular silicon intubation for management of lacrimal canalicular obstruction
Journal of the Egyptian Ophthalmological Society
autostable-ii self-retaining stent
bicanalicular silicone tube
canalicular obstruction
epiphora
title Autostable-II stent versus bicanalicular silicon intubation for management of lacrimal canalicular obstruction
title_full Autostable-II stent versus bicanalicular silicon intubation for management of lacrimal canalicular obstruction
title_fullStr Autostable-II stent versus bicanalicular silicon intubation for management of lacrimal canalicular obstruction
title_full_unstemmed Autostable-II stent versus bicanalicular silicon intubation for management of lacrimal canalicular obstruction
title_short Autostable-II stent versus bicanalicular silicon intubation for management of lacrimal canalicular obstruction
title_sort autostable ii stent versus bicanalicular silicon intubation for management of lacrimal canalicular obstruction
topic autostable-ii self-retaining stent
bicanalicular silicone tube
canalicular obstruction
epiphora
url https://journals.lww.com/10.4103/ejos.ejos_38_24
work_keys_str_mv AT zamzammakhalil autostableiistentversusbicanalicularsiliconintubationformanagementoflacrimalcanalicularobstruction
AT raafatmaabdallah autostableiistentversusbicanalicularsiliconintubationformanagementoflacrimalcanalicularobstruction
AT ahmedmkelshafei autostableiistentversusbicanalicularsiliconintubationformanagementoflacrimalcanalicularobstruction
AT amramabdelrahman autostableiistentversusbicanalicularsiliconintubationformanagementoflacrimalcanalicularobstruction