Retrospective safety study of the herrick lacrimal plug: a device used to occlude the lacrimal canaliculus.

Clarence E Jones, Manek Anklesaria, Alan D Gordon, Robert E Prouty, Richard Rashid, Raj K Singla, John L Schachet
{"title":"Retrospective safety study of the herrick lacrimal plug: a device used to occlude the lacrimal canaliculus.","authors":"Clarence E Jones,&nbsp;Manek Anklesaria,&nbsp;Alan D Gordon,&nbsp;Robert E Prouty,&nbsp;Richard Rashid,&nbsp;Raj K Singla,&nbsp;John L Schachet","doi":"10.1097/01.ICL.0000029376.96299.CA","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of the Herrick Lacrimal Plug (HLP) (Lacrimedics, Eastsound, WA) by reviewing medical records obtained from patients in whom the HLP was implanted.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 228, primarily dry-eye, patients who had received one or more HLP implants at 19 centers during 1994 were included in the review; both centers and patients were randomly selected for inclusion. Medical records were examined for evidence of adverse events, which were characterized by presumed relationship to treatment, time of occurrence, severity, treatment required, and clinical outcome. Patients were contacted by phone whenever possible to verify the accuracy of the information extracted from their medical records.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 35 adverse events likely, or definitively related to treatment, were recorded for 25 (11.0%) of 227 evaluable patients who were followed for 0 to 4.6 years (mean, 0.9 years). The most common adverse event was epiphora (21), followed by plug displacement (7), ocular irritation (5), ocular pain (1), and headache (1). Sixteen (7.0%) patients (15 epiphora, 1 headache) had one or more plugs removed using a perfusion technique, with symptoms resolving for 13 patients, reduced for one but persisting for the remaining two. None of the baseline or treatment variables were found to be predictors of the occurrence of an adverse event following plug implantation.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Approximately 10% of the patients who underwent implantation with the HLP in this series presented with a device-related adverse event, most commonly epiphora, which usually resolved following plug removal with a saline perfusion method. For the two patients (0.9%) whose epiphora did not resolve following plug removal, both had the same symptom before plug implantation, so it is unclear if persistence was the result of plug retention in the lacrimal drainage system or merely continuation of a preexisting condition.</p>","PeriodicalId":22367,"journal":{"name":"The CLAO journal : official publication of the Contact Lens Association of Ophthalmologists, Inc","volume":"28 4","pages":"206-10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The CLAO journal : official publication of the Contact Lens Association of Ophthalmologists, Inc","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ICL.0000029376.96299.CA","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of the Herrick Lacrimal Plug (HLP) (Lacrimedics, Eastsound, WA) by reviewing medical records obtained from patients in whom the HLP was implanted.

Methods: A total of 228, primarily dry-eye, patients who had received one or more HLP implants at 19 centers during 1994 were included in the review; both centers and patients were randomly selected for inclusion. Medical records were examined for evidence of adverse events, which were characterized by presumed relationship to treatment, time of occurrence, severity, treatment required, and clinical outcome. Patients were contacted by phone whenever possible to verify the accuracy of the information extracted from their medical records.

Results: A total of 35 adverse events likely, or definitively related to treatment, were recorded for 25 (11.0%) of 227 evaluable patients who were followed for 0 to 4.6 years (mean, 0.9 years). The most common adverse event was epiphora (21), followed by plug displacement (7), ocular irritation (5), ocular pain (1), and headache (1). Sixteen (7.0%) patients (15 epiphora, 1 headache) had one or more plugs removed using a perfusion technique, with symptoms resolving for 13 patients, reduced for one but persisting for the remaining two. None of the baseline or treatment variables were found to be predictors of the occurrence of an adverse event following plug implantation.

Discussion: Approximately 10% of the patients who underwent implantation with the HLP in this series presented with a device-related adverse event, most commonly epiphora, which usually resolved following plug removal with a saline perfusion method. For the two patients (0.9%) whose epiphora did not resolve following plug removal, both had the same symptom before plug implantation, so it is unclear if persistence was the result of plug retention in the lacrimal drainage system or merely continuation of a preexisting condition.

herrick泪栓的回顾性安全性研究:一种用于堵塞泪小管的装置。
目的:本研究的目的是评估Herrick泪塞(HLP) (Lacrimedics, Eastsound, WA)的安全性,通过回顾从植入HLP的患者中获得的医疗记录。方法:回顾了1994年期间在19个中心接受过一次或多次HLP植入的228例干眼症患者;两个中心和患者都是随机选择的。检查医疗记录以寻找不良事件的证据,其特征是与治疗、发生时间、严重程度、所需治疗和临床结果的推定关系。尽可能通过电话联系患者,以核实从其医疗记录中提取的信息的准确性。结果:227例可评估患者中,25例(11.0%)共记录了35例可能或明确与治疗相关的不良事件,随访时间为0至4.6年(平均0.9年)。最常见的不良事件是眼珠脱落(21例),其次是眼塞移位(7例)、眼部刺激(5例)、眼痛(1例)和头痛(1例)。16例(7.0%)患者(15例眼珠脱落,1例头痛)使用灌注技术取出了一个或多个眼塞,其中13例症状缓解,1例症状减轻,其余2例症状持续。没有发现基线或治疗变量是栓植入后不良事件发生的预测因子。讨论:在本研究中,接受HLP植入的患者中约有10%出现了与器械相关的不良事件,最常见的是显泪,通常在用盐水灌注法取出栓后消退。对于2例(0.9%)在拔除堵头后眼珠未消失的患者,他们在植入堵头前都有相同的症状,因此尚不清楚是堵头滞留在泪道引流系统还是仅仅是既往疾病的延续。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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