Khalid W Helmi, Ahmed S Abdulhamid, Mohammed S Alomari, Ali S Alsudais, Badran S Alqurashi, Abdullah Alsharif, Abdulrahman H Alzahrani, Abdulrahman M Bahalaq, Mohammed F Qutub, Hashem S Almarzouki
{"title":"经导管激光辅助和外部泪囊鼻腔造口术治疗原发性获得性鼻泪管阻塞的解剖和功能成功:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Khalid W Helmi, Ahmed S Abdulhamid, Mohammed S Alomari, Ali S Alsudais, Badran S Alqurashi, Abdullah Alsharif, Abdulrahman H Alzahrani, Abdulrahman M Bahalaq, Mohammed F Qutub, Hashem S Almarzouki","doi":"10.1186/s12886-024-03818-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction (PANDO) is a condition in which tear ducts are blocked, leading to epiphora and dacryocystitis. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to measure the ability of transcanalicular dacryocystorhinostomy (TC-DCR) as an alternative approach to PANDO compared to traditional external dacryocystorhinostomy (EX-DCR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Our search included Embase, Medline, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). We included only observational studies, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and quasi-experimental studies that compared TC-DCR and EX-DCR. The outcomes measured were anatomical and functional success rates, intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, and surgical time. Statistically significant results were determined as a p value of less than 0.05; thus, a confidence interval of 95% was used. Dichotomous outcomes were reported via risk ratios (RR), whereas continuous outcomes were reported using standardized mean differences (SMD).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was a statistically significant difference in anatomical success (RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.97; P = 0.02), favoring EX-DCR; functional success (RR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.78-0.97; P = 0.01), favoring EX-DCR; operative (OR) time (SMD = -2.42, 95% CI -2.92 - -1.91; P < 0.00001) favoring TC-DCR; and intraoperative complications (RR = 0.16, 95% CI 0.06-0.43; P = 0.0003), favoring TC-DCR. Moreover, the subgroup analysis comparing single-diode TC-DCR to EX-DCR revealed a statistically significant difference in terms of anatomical success and functional success; however, the comparison of multidiode TC-DCR to EX-DCR revealed no statistically significant difference.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>More research should be conducted to compare the anatomical and functional success of muli-diode TC-DCR with EX-DCR because the analysis performed comparing them revealed no statistical significance.</p>","PeriodicalId":9058,"journal":{"name":"BMC Ophthalmology","volume":"25 1","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11702077/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transcanalicular laser-assisted and external dacryocystorhinostomy anatomical and functional success in primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction: systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Khalid W Helmi, Ahmed S Abdulhamid, Mohammed S Alomari, Ali S Alsudais, Badran S Alqurashi, Abdullah Alsharif, Abdulrahman H Alzahrani, Abdulrahman M Bahalaq, Mohammed F Qutub, Hashem S Almarzouki\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12886-024-03818-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction (PANDO) is a condition in which tear ducts are blocked, leading to epiphora and dacryocystitis. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to measure the ability of transcanalicular dacryocystorhinostomy (TC-DCR) as an alternative approach to PANDO compared to traditional external dacryocystorhinostomy (EX-DCR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Our search included Embase, Medline, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). We included only observational studies, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and quasi-experimental studies that compared TC-DCR and EX-DCR. The outcomes measured were anatomical and functional success rates, intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, and surgical time. Statistically significant results were determined as a p value of less than 0.05; thus, a confidence interval of 95% was used. Dichotomous outcomes were reported via risk ratios (RR), whereas continuous outcomes were reported using standardized mean differences (SMD).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was a statistically significant difference in anatomical success (RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.97; P = 0.02), favoring EX-DCR; functional success (RR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.78-0.97; P = 0.01), favoring EX-DCR; operative (OR) time (SMD = -2.42, 95% CI -2.92 - -1.91; P < 0.00001) favoring TC-DCR; and intraoperative complications (RR = 0.16, 95% CI 0.06-0.43; P = 0.0003), favoring TC-DCR. Moreover, the subgroup analysis comparing single-diode TC-DCR to EX-DCR revealed a statistically significant difference in terms of anatomical success and functional success; however, the comparison of multidiode TC-DCR to EX-DCR revealed no statistically significant difference.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>More research should be conducted to compare the anatomical and functional success of muli-diode TC-DCR with EX-DCR because the analysis performed comparing them revealed no statistical significance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9058,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11702077/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-024-03818-7\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-024-03818-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:原发性获得性鼻泪管阻塞(PANDO)是一种泪管阻塞,导致泪漏和泪囊炎的疾病。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在衡量经导管泪囊鼻腔造口术(TC-DCR)作为PANDO替代方法的能力,与传统的外泪囊鼻腔造口术(EX-DCR)相比。方法:我们的检索包括Embase、Medline和Cochrane中央对照试验登记处(Central)。我们只纳入了比较TC-DCR和EX-DCR的观察性研究、随机对照试验(rct)和准实验研究。测量的结果包括解剖和功能成功率、术中并发症、术后并发症和手术时间。以p值< 0.05判定结果有统计学意义;因此,采用95%的置信区间。通过风险比(RR)报告二分结果,而使用标准化平均差异(SMD)报告连续结果。结果:两组解剖成功率差异有统计学意义(RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.97;P = 0.02),支持EX-DCR;功能成功(RR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.78-0.97;P = 0.01),支持EX-DCR;手术(OR)时间(SMD = -2.42, 95% CI = -2.92 ~ -1.91;P结论:多二极管TC-DCR与EX-DCR在解剖和功能上的成功比较尚需进一步研究,因为两者的比较分析没有统计学意义。
Transcanalicular laser-assisted and external dacryocystorhinostomy anatomical and functional success in primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Background: Primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction (PANDO) is a condition in which tear ducts are blocked, leading to epiphora and dacryocystitis. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to measure the ability of transcanalicular dacryocystorhinostomy (TC-DCR) as an alternative approach to PANDO compared to traditional external dacryocystorhinostomy (EX-DCR).
Methods: Our search included Embase, Medline, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). We included only observational studies, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and quasi-experimental studies that compared TC-DCR and EX-DCR. The outcomes measured were anatomical and functional success rates, intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, and surgical time. Statistically significant results were determined as a p value of less than 0.05; thus, a confidence interval of 95% was used. Dichotomous outcomes were reported via risk ratios (RR), whereas continuous outcomes were reported using standardized mean differences (SMD).
Results: There was a statistically significant difference in anatomical success (RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.97; P = 0.02), favoring EX-DCR; functional success (RR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.78-0.97; P = 0.01), favoring EX-DCR; operative (OR) time (SMD = -2.42, 95% CI -2.92 - -1.91; P < 0.00001) favoring TC-DCR; and intraoperative complications (RR = 0.16, 95% CI 0.06-0.43; P = 0.0003), favoring TC-DCR. Moreover, the subgroup analysis comparing single-diode TC-DCR to EX-DCR revealed a statistically significant difference in terms of anatomical success and functional success; however, the comparison of multidiode TC-DCR to EX-DCR revealed no statistically significant difference.
Conclusions: More research should be conducted to compare the anatomical and functional success of muli-diode TC-DCR with EX-DCR because the analysis performed comparing them revealed no statistical significance.
期刊介绍:
BMC Ophthalmology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of eye disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.