Comparison of clinical efficacy between two kinds of comprehensive therapy for refractory lacrimal duct obstruction

中华眼外伤职业眼病杂志 Pub Date : 2019-12-25 DOI:10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.2095-1477.2019.12.004

Fang Liu

{"title":"Comparison of clinical efficacy between two kinds of comprehensive therapy for refractory lacrimal duct obstruction","authors":"Fang Liu","doi":"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.2095-1477.2019.12.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective \nTo compare the clinical efficacy between two kinds of comprehensive therapy for the treament of refractory lacrimal duct obstruction. \n \n \nMethods \nThe clinical data of 96 eyes of 72 cases with refractory lacrimal duct obstruction from Jan.2017 to Mar.2018 in this hospital were analyzed retrospectively. In trial group, 48 eyes, were treated with cyclosporine A eye drops after lacrimal passage laser recanclization and intubation, and the control group, 48 eyes, were treated with tobramycin dexamethasone eye ointment. The lacrimal passage stent was retained for 3 months and followed up for 6 months after extubation. \n \n \nResults \nAt the end of follow-up, the cure rate of trial group was 83.33%(40/48), the improvement rate was 12.50%(6/48), and the ineffective rate was 4.17%(2/48). The cure rate of control group was 66.67%(32/48), the improvement rate was 20.83%(10/48) and the ineffective rate was 12.50% (6/48). The total effective rate of the trial group was 95.83% (46 /48), which was better than that of the control group (87.50%, 42/48). The difference was statistically significant(χ2=2.136, P=0.001). \n \n \nConclusion \nOn the basis of operation, application of cyclosporine A eye drops are more effective than tobramycin dexamethasone eye ointment in the treatment of refractory lacrimal passage obstruction. \n \n \nKey words: \nObstruction, lacrimal passage, refractory; Laser, lacrimal passage; Catheterization; Eye drops, cyclosporine A; Eye ointment, tobramycin dexamethasone","PeriodicalId":10126,"journal":{"name":"中华眼外伤职业眼病杂志","volume":"30 1","pages":"896-900"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中华眼外伤职业眼病杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.2095-1477.2019.12.004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective To compare the clinical efficacy between two kinds of comprehensive therapy for the treament of refractory lacrimal duct obstruction. Methods The clinical data of 96 eyes of 72 cases with refractory lacrimal duct obstruction from Jan.2017 to Mar.2018 in this hospital were analyzed retrospectively. In trial group, 48 eyes, were treated with cyclosporine A eye drops after lacrimal passage laser recanclization and intubation, and the control group, 48 eyes, were treated with tobramycin dexamethasone eye ointment. The lacrimal passage stent was retained for 3 months and followed up for 6 months after extubation. Results At the end of follow-up, the cure rate of trial group was 83.33%(40/48), the improvement rate was 12.50%(6/48), and the ineffective rate was 4.17%(2/48). The cure rate of control group was 66.67%(32/48), the improvement rate was 20.83%(10/48) and the ineffective rate was 12.50% (6/48). The total effective rate of the trial group was 95.83% (46 /48), which was better than that of the control group (87.50%, 42/48). The difference was statistically significant(χ2=2.136, P=0.001). Conclusion On the basis of operation, application of cyclosporine A eye drops are more effective than tobramycin dexamethasone eye ointment in the treatment of refractory lacrimal passage obstruction. Key words: Obstruction, lacrimal passage, refractory; Laser, lacrimal passage; Catheterization; Eye drops, cyclosporine A; Eye ointment, tobramycin dexamethasone

查看原文本刊更多论文

两种综合疗法治疗难治性泪管梗阻的临床疗效比较

目的比较两种综合疗法治疗难治性泪道梗阻的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析我院2017年1月~ 2018年3月收治的72例难治性泪道梗阻患者96眼的临床资料。试验组48只眼采用泪道激光再通插管后滴环菌素A滴眼液治疗，对照组48只眼采用妥布霉素地塞米松眼膏治疗。泪道支架保留3个月，拔管后随访6个月。结果随访结束时，试验组治愈率为83.33%(40/48)，改善率为12.50%(6/48)，不良率为4.17%(2/48)。对照组治愈率为66.67%(32/48)，改善率为20.83%(10/48)，不良率为12.50%(6/48)。试验组总有效率为95.83%(46 /48)，优于对照组(87.50%，42/48)。差异有统计学意义(χ2=2.136, P=0.001)。结论在手术基础上应用环孢素A滴眼液治疗难治性泪道梗阻的疗效优于妥布霉素地塞米松眼膏。关键词:梗阻，泪道，难治性;激光，泪道;导管插入术;眼药水，环孢素A;眼膏，妥布霉素，地塞米松

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

中华眼外伤职业眼病杂志

自引率

0.00%

发文量

8728

期刊介绍：