Share
𝕏 Facebook LinkedIn

[Recanalization of nasolacrimal duct with radio frequency: preliminary study].

PAPER pubmed Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia 2012 Other Effect: benefit Evidence: Very low

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the nasolacrimal duct reconstitution with radio frequency for restoration of lacrimal flow in cases of nasolacrimal duct obstruction. METHODS: The procedure was carried out in 16 eyes of 16 patients (13 women and 3 men) by the same surgeon, with monopolar high-frequency device at 450 kHz and 150 W, with local anesthesia under sedation. Inclusion criteria were lower lacrimal system obstruction (confirmed by dacryocystogram) and age over 18 years old. Exclusion criteria were previous trauma, acute dacryocystitis, cutaneous fistula, mucocele, previous lacrimal surgery and cardiac pacemaker. RESULTS: Patients were followed for at least 120 days, patients were clinically evaluated at outpatient clinics for the presence of secretion, epiphora, reflux at compression of the lacrimal sac, placement of silicone tube and Milder test. At the 90-day postoperative visit, 13 patients had positive irrigation (81.25%) with clearance of lacrimal duct and 3 cases (18.75%) presented irrigation failure. CONCLUSION: Nasolacrimal duct reconstitution with radio frequency was effective in treating nasolacrimal duct obstruction.

AI evidence extraction

At a glance
Study type
Other
Effect direction
benefit
Population
Adults (>18 years) with lower lacrimal system (nasolacrimal duct) obstruction
Sample size
16
Exposure
medical radiofrequency device (monopolar high-frequency) · 0.45 MHz
Evidence strength
Very low
Confidence: 78% · Peer-reviewed: yes

Main findings

In 16 patients followed for at least 120 days, at the 90-day postoperative visit 13/16 (81.25%) had positive irrigation indicating duct clearance, while 3/16 (18.75%) had irrigation failure. The authors conclude the radiofrequency procedure was effective for nasolacrimal duct obstruction.

Outcomes measured

  • Nasolacrimal duct patency/clearance (positive irrigation)
  • Irrigation failure
  • Clinical signs/symptoms: secretion, epiphora, reflux on lacrimal sac compression
  • Milder test
  • Silicone tube placement

Limitations

  • Preliminary study
  • Small sample size (16 patients)
  • No control/comparator group described
  • Single-surgeon procedure
View raw extracted JSON
{
    "study_type": "other",
    "exposure": {
        "band": null,
        "source": "medical radiofrequency device (monopolar high-frequency)",
        "frequency_mhz": 0.450000000000000011102230246251565404236316680908203125,
        "sar_wkg": null,
        "duration": null
    },
    "population": "Adults (>18 years) with lower lacrimal system (nasolacrimal duct) obstruction",
    "sample_size": 16,
    "outcomes": [
        "Nasolacrimal duct patency/clearance (positive irrigation)",
        "Irrigation failure",
        "Clinical signs/symptoms: secretion, epiphora, reflux on lacrimal sac compression",
        "Milder test",
        "Silicone tube placement"
    ],
    "main_findings": "In 16 patients followed for at least 120 days, at the 90-day postoperative visit 13/16 (81.25%) had positive irrigation indicating duct clearance, while 3/16 (18.75%) had irrigation failure. The authors conclude the radiofrequency procedure was effective for nasolacrimal duct obstruction.",
    "effect_direction": "benefit",
    "limitations": [
        "Preliminary study",
        "Small sample size (16 patients)",
        "No control/comparator group described",
        "Single-surgeon procedure"
    ],
    "evidence_strength": "very_low",
    "confidence": 0.7800000000000000266453525910037569701671600341796875,
    "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
    "keywords": [
        "radiofrequency",
        "nasolacrimal duct obstruction",
        "recanalization",
        "lacrimal flow",
        "ophthalmology",
        "450 kHz",
        "monopolar device"
    ],
    "suggested_hubs": []
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract/metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This content is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice.

Comments

Log in to comment.

No comments yet.