Dacryoendoscopic Findings of Patients with Lacrimal Drainage Obstruction Associated with Cancer Treatment.

Q3 Medicine
Yuri Kim, Helen Lew
{"title":"Dacryoendoscopic Findings of Patients with Lacrimal Drainage Obstruction Associated with Cancer Treatment.","authors":"Yuri Kim,&nbsp;Helen Lew","doi":"10.3341/kjo.2022.0051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the diagnosis and treatment outcome of lacrimal drainage obstruction of patients who underwent systemic chemotherapy (CTx) or radioactive iodine treatment (RAI) by using dacryoendoscopy and at the same time performing dacryoendoscopy-guided silicone tube insertion (STI) to treat epiphora.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From July 2017 to December 2020, the medical records of 11 patients (16 eyes) were diagnosed with lacrimal drainage obstruction after CTx or RAI and underwent dacryoendoscopy-guided STI were reviewed retrospectively. We tried to count the number of obstructive sites in total patients using slit-lamp examination and dacryoendoscopic findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 11 patients, 16 eyes, were enrolled in this study. The onset of epiphora in the CTx group (3.0 ± 4.0 months) was significantly shorter than that in the RAI group (52.6 ± 36.5 months, p = 0.001). There were total 32 obstructive sites including 28 obstructive sites of dacryoendoscopic findings and four sites of punctual stenosis in total 16 cases. Using dacryoendoscopy, granulation findings was dominant in RAI patients (p = 0.038) and mucus finding was frequent mostly in lacrimal sac and canaliculus. In the CTx group, mucosal edema finding was dominant (p = 0.038) and fibrotic membrane finding was frequent in all levels of lacrimal drainage system. Regarding the obstructive location, lacrimal sac was the most frequently obstructed site in the two groups (p = 0.038).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The onset of epiphora in the CTx group was significantly earlier than in the RAI group. In the CTx group, mucosal edema finding was frequent in all levels of lacrimal drainage system. In the RAI group, granulation finding was frequent mostly in lacrimal sac and canaliculus. Since the clinical outcome was satisfactory, intervention with dacryoendoscopy-guided STI could be a treatment of choice in patients with epiphora after CTx or RAI.</p>","PeriodicalId":17883,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Ophthalmology : KJO","volume":"36 6","pages":"509-517"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/83/7a/kjo-2022-0051.PMC9745344.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Ophthalmology : KJO","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3341/kjo.2022.0051","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the diagnosis and treatment outcome of lacrimal drainage obstruction of patients who underwent systemic chemotherapy (CTx) or radioactive iodine treatment (RAI) by using dacryoendoscopy and at the same time performing dacryoendoscopy-guided silicone tube insertion (STI) to treat epiphora.

Methods: From July 2017 to December 2020, the medical records of 11 patients (16 eyes) were diagnosed with lacrimal drainage obstruction after CTx or RAI and underwent dacryoendoscopy-guided STI were reviewed retrospectively. We tried to count the number of obstructive sites in total patients using slit-lamp examination and dacryoendoscopic findings.

Results: A total of 11 patients, 16 eyes, were enrolled in this study. The onset of epiphora in the CTx group (3.0 ± 4.0 months) was significantly shorter than that in the RAI group (52.6 ± 36.5 months, p = 0.001). There were total 32 obstructive sites including 28 obstructive sites of dacryoendoscopic findings and four sites of punctual stenosis in total 16 cases. Using dacryoendoscopy, granulation findings was dominant in RAI patients (p = 0.038) and mucus finding was frequent mostly in lacrimal sac and canaliculus. In the CTx group, mucosal edema finding was dominant (p = 0.038) and fibrotic membrane finding was frequent in all levels of lacrimal drainage system. Regarding the obstructive location, lacrimal sac was the most frequently obstructed site in the two groups (p = 0.038).

Conclusions: The onset of epiphora in the CTx group was significantly earlier than in the RAI group. In the CTx group, mucosal edema finding was frequent in all levels of lacrimal drainage system. In the RAI group, granulation finding was frequent mostly in lacrimal sac and canaliculus. Since the clinical outcome was satisfactory, intervention with dacryoendoscopy-guided STI could be a treatment of choice in patients with epiphora after CTx or RAI.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

泪道引流梗阻与肿瘤治疗相关患者的泪内镜表现。
目的:比较泪道内窥镜下行全身化疗(CTx)或放射性碘治疗(RAI)患者泪道引流梗阻的诊断和治疗效果,同时泪道内窥镜引导下硅胶管插入(STI)治疗泪道外溢。方法:回顾性分析2017年7月至2020年12月11例(16眼)经CTx或RAI诊断为泪道引流梗阻并行泪内镜引导下泪道引流术的病例。我们试图通过裂隙灯检查和泪镜检查来计算患者中梗阻性部位的数量。结果:共纳入11例患者,16只眼。CTx组显泪发生时间(3.0±4.0个月)明显短于RAI组(52.6±36.5个月,p = 0.001)。16例患者共32个梗阻性部位,其中泪镜检查梗阻性部位28个,点状狭窄4个。泪内窥镜检查发现RAI患者以肉芽为主(p = 0.038),泪囊和泪小管多见粘液。CTx组以粘膜水肿为主(p = 0.038),各级泪道引流系统均可见纤维化膜。在梗阻部位上,泪囊是两组最常见的梗阻部位(p = 0.038)。结论:CTx组显泪发作明显早于RAI组。在CTx组,粘膜水肿的发现是常见的各级泪道引流系统。RAI组多见于泪囊和泪小管。由于临床结果令人满意,泪内镜引导下的STI干预可以作为CTx或RAI后显泪患者的一种治疗选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Korean Journal of Ophthalmology : KJO
Korean Journal of Ophthalmology : KJO Medicine-Ophthalmology
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
84
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信